There’s a youtuber who goes by the name “the amazing atheist” who I’ve never cared much for — he’s a raving MRA who ought to change his name to “the asinine atheist” — who has just flamed out on reddit in a revealing long angry thread. I don’t recommend it. It’s very ugly. The only virtue is that this already marginal hater on the fringes of atheism just made himself even less relevant, and we can all wash our hands of him now.
I’ll put a few highlights from his rants below the fold; these aren’t really surprising, since this kind of thing has always been part of his youtube schtick, but you might want to brace yourself for the virulence. He really, really hates uppity feminist women, and he finds threats of rape to be an appropriate response to them. This whole affair was prompted by a poster on reddit going by the nickname “ICumWhenIKillMen”, which I find reprehensible too, but it in no way justifies the eruption of even greater hatred that this “amazing” atheist (going by the name terroja or TJ) spouts.
I will make you a rape victim if you don’t fuck off.
Yeah. Well, you deserved it. So, fuck you. I hope it happens again soon. I’m tired of being treated like shit by you mean little cunts and then you using your rape as an excuse. Fuck you. I think we should give the guy who raped you a medal. I hope you fucking drown in rape semen, you ugly, mean-spirited cow. Actually, I don’t believe you were ever raped! What man would be tasteless enough to stick his dick into a human cesspool like you? Nice gif of a turd going into my mouth. Is that kind of like the way that rapists dick went in your pussy? Or did he use your asshole? Or was it both? Maybe you should think about it really hard for the next few hours. Relive it as much as possible. You know? Try to recall: was it my pussy or my ass?
I’m going to rape you with my fist.
BTW, you have to admit, when I told you that I hope you drown in rape semen, you got a little wet, didn’t you? It’s okay. We’re friends now. You can share.
Fuck you, liar. All night you douches have tried to shit on me and tear me down. Then when I do the same it’s like, “Whoa man! That’s too far. Calm down.” No. Fuck you. Go get raped in whatever orifice you have to get fucking raped in. I am sick of your shit. I regret nothing.
Nasty piece of work, isn’t he? To top it all off, after a long night of rage, he makes a youtube video whining about arguing with feminists. You don’t need to watch it, it’s ugly and pathetic, since fortunately someone else made a transcript. I do want to seriously address one part of it, though, because it’s a claim I often seen these freaked-out misogynist kooks make.
Let me just clue you in, folks, any fucking belief system or belief structure, well any belief structure or belief system is just WRONG to begin with. I mean, fucking think for yourself, don't just join some stupid fucking group. But- but- ESPECIALLY the ones that try to control your sexuality and that tell you that the things you desire are wrong and shameful.
If that starts to happen, even if everything up until that point seemed pretty cool, that's when you gotta get the fuck out. When you start hearing like, "Oh yeah, and by the way, those things you like to do sexually? Those are aaaalll wrong. You can't be doing that anymore." 'Cause that's really how any fucking, uhm, ideology controls, people.
And why do you think pretty much every religion in existence tries to control your sexuality? Why do you think, that, the number one thing that destroys a politician is, an extramarital affair. Or if you're Republican, you know, you suck a dick in the bathroom or something.
I mean, it's always about sexuality. It's always about controlling people's sexuality. Because, y'know, that's, err, that's like one of the big, I mean, y'know, if you're gonna look at like Freudian psychology, which is like outdated and everything. But still, I think Freud had a point when he said that the two major driving factors in human life are sex and death.
So if you'd control sex, you'd pretty much control a motherfucker. And that's like the two areas that, y'know, Religion has gone after, sex and death. It's like, "Oh, you can't have this kinda sex. And then, when you die, you get to go to a magical sky palace."
And y'know feminism doesn't really do much to control the death thing, but they sure love controlling fucking human sexuality.
That’s a lot of bullshit.
The feminism I embrace is sex-positive. It includes heterosexual men and women, homosexual men and women, trans men and women, and every kink and twist you can imagine. It is not about controlling your sexuality, but liberating it — it most definitely does not say “you can’t have this kinda sex”. It does not judge your sexual behaviors and say “Those are aaaalll wrong.” The Amazing Atheist/terroja/TJ is just lying when he claims that’s what’s going on.
Because here’s the thing: you have freedom to exercise your sexuality, but that does not mean you get to impose your sexuality on others. If, for example, your kink is peeing on women, and you’ve got a partner whose kink is being peed upon, I’m happy for the two of you, I hope you have a grand time, but please, if I ask you not to share your stories with me because I find it unpleasant, respect my wishes…and do not imagine for one second that your desire to pee on someone trumps their desire to not be peed on. I’m not going to judge you or tell you what you can and can’t do in your bedroom unless you’re trying to force it on someone who is unwilling. That’s the hard and fast line you don’t get to cross.
Rape is a fundamental violation of that basic principle of autonomy and respect for other people’s desires. This guy jokes about rape, threatens rape, and doesn’t seem to recognize the line between consensual sexual activities and the violent act of rape. He’s amazingly self-centered; he complains bitterly about the limits on his desires to put his penis where ever he wants as an awful example of feminism controlling his sexuality, completely oblivious to the fact that what he ultimately wants to do is control other people’s sexuality, putting it in service to his fantasies.
That moral blindness is standard MRA egocentrism; the whole premise of the pick-up artist is to find a way to manipulate other people into doing their sexual bidding.
The other element you’ll often see in these guys is rage at women’s sexuality: they get extremely upset at the idea of the object of their desires making independent sexual choices. Women are supposed to be either chaste and not being sexy at all, or they must submit to the man’s desires, servicing the man’s sexual needs by whatever methods the man dictates. A woman cheerfully flirting with her choice of a partner? She’s a hypocrite (because feminists are supposed to hate sex!) and she’s a ball-buster (because she’s not having sex with me!) and if ever she said “no” to a man, she must be demeaned and detested. Or possibly raped, just to teach her a lesson.
The only control issue here is who gets to control sex: do women get to be in complete charge of their own sexuality, or should they hand it over to the whims of men? And in their answers to that question, MRAs like this TJ jerk are fundamentally allying themselves with the patriarchal religions of Abraham.
The Atheist Experience also discusses this awful little man.
The awful little man has posted a rebuttal. As you might expect from this guy, it’s full of misconceptions.
I knew it was inevitable the day that I started talking about feminism that one day, PZ Meyers would open his gob to mount some manner of lazy and lackluster attack against me. He is a radical feminist who once claimed that when it came to gender issues men just need to “shut up and listen to women.” That’s a direct quote, by the way. He really said “shut up and listen to women.” Men, in his opinion, have nothing useful to say on gender issues.
Yes, that quote is here. That last sentence? More bullshit. Of course men have useful things to say on gender issues — but you have to make room for women to speak, too. It’s amazing how often men, especially the obtuse, blithely patriarchal men, are unable to simply listen to women for two minutes without overriding them.
He has more excuses.
What PZ Meyers may not be aware of is that my words were promulgated by a conversation with a male feminist who told me in no uncertain terms that looking at females sexually was wrong. It’s wrong to follow your natural imperative to note the sexual attractiveness of a woman in your presence, because that makes women feel bad. That’s nonsense. I am a biological organism that got here because my ancestors loved to fuck, and fucking starts with lust. I’m glad that PZ Meyers doesn’t take issue with this, but when he claims that ALL feminists are sex positive, he’s simply being disingenuous. There are plenty of feminists, many of whom I have addressed in the past, who are virulently anti-porn and anti-male sexuality. Meyer’s ignores this at the peril of his credibility.
First of all, nowhere have I ever claimed that all feminists are sex positive; some feminists are assholes, just like some atheists (case in point: The “Amazing” Atheist) are total flaming jerkwads.
But also, I really, really despise the naturalistic fallacy. Why, yes, some of my ancestors were stoat-like mammaloids one step beyond a reptile, and the males would wrestle the females down and ejaculate into their reproductive tracts whether the female was cooperative or not. I wouldn’t even be surprised to learn that some significant fraction of my human ancestors were locked in loveless marriages, or even brought about some of their progeny by rape. These facts do not justify stoat-like fucking or rape.
Lust and fucking are great, but that also does not imply that they should be the boundaries of our relationships — I lust after my wife all the time, but I also recognize her as a fellow sapient human being with her own interests. I also meet women all the time and don’t have sex with them — in fact, no matter how much of a Lothario you might be, the fraction of women with whom you will have sex is infinitesimally small. You are a stunted and impoverished human being if you look at half the population of the planet only through the lens of lust and sex; that’s probably the least important perspective on human relationships that you’ve got.
Of course you can notice that a member of the sex you find stimulating is attractive; that’s not the issue. It’s the sad wankers who meet strange women and think “great rack!” instead of “I wonder what she’s got to say?” that have the real problem.
And then he completely misses the mark.
Here’s an M. Night Shymalan style twist for you, PZ. Something that shatters your narrative of me as a would-be rapist just looking for the right bush to hide in. I’m a submissive. As in, I like to be dominated. Spanked. Humiliated. As in, the exact opposite of what you’re portaying me as.
So? I had no assumptions at all about his sexual habits. He seems to be obsessed with his own gratification, and there’s nothing about that that is incompatible with being a submissive. Although the fact that he likes to be humiliated does explain much about his behavior on the internet.
Also, does he even realize that saying you’ve got a “Shyamalan twist” to your story just means you’ve got a really shitty gimmick?
[ot]
Sometimes I want to dig up Elanor Rooseweldt from whereever she is and slap her silly.
Oh please drunk people fighting on the internet in the middle of the night will say anything. Of course it’s possible that brings out his true nature, but the overwhelming majority of his video’s paint an entirely different picture.
…
Your “opinion” sucks. What the fuck qualifies this guy as a feminist?
John Morales:
Yeah. That’s the whole “natural rights” Libertarian misunderstanding of social interaction.
The excuse he’s given in the past is that he is a rape victim, so it’s okay.
http://youtu.be/kjakFitGc7s
Watch it if you aren’t too attached to your sanity.
OH, and because they don’t have them that somehow implies they don’t deserve them? You are a total fucktard. lol
Not to mention that the other apologists are arguing that these comments are just jokes. It seems to me that joking and uncontrollable rage would come from two different places.
The definition of feminist, and that definition says nothing about disqualification for making rape jokes, or even threatening someone with rape. In fact even a rapist can be a feminist.
Hee hee. Yeah. Couldn’t possibly be that, oh, I don’t know, PHYSICAL ABUSE IS A FREQUENT CAUSE OF DIVORCE. Nope.
mikepaps:
A dictionary feminist? That’s your defense?
Oh, fuck, this is sad.
This I have to hear.
Only in the sense that I can be a singer…
(full personal disclosure – people usually don’t recognize the tune if I try to sing)
No, actually they won’t. A decent person, no matter how drunk, won’t resort to threats of rape.
I’d say it’s obvious that it’s his true nature. In vino veritas, eh? So much for your continued moronic defense of this asshole.
By the way, stop putting a godsdamned apostrophe in videos. It’s a plural, not a possessive. I don’t give a shit about his previous videos – repeatedly threatening someone with rape speaks for itself. Someone who does such a thing is not a decent person nor are they a feminist.
I didn’t say a single word about deserving, I simply pointed out that you were wrong about every person on the planet having such rights. You’re the one who makes judgments about who is deserving of empathy or not. You’re projecting, Cupcake.
Nigel:
Sad isn’t a strong enough word. Pathetic, maybe. Ridiculously moronic, perhaps. Herp a derp would work, too.
i recognize that your one of those dudes who beats his chest while screaming endlessly about “MY RIGHTS MY RIGHTS!” without ever stopping to think about what rights are or where they come from, but since youre the one proposing this blanket right to freedom of speech, shouldnt you put forward at least a half effort to explain why?
im not saying i agree or disagree with you, just curious if you can actually explain yourself…
I can’t even comprehend the thought process that must be working itself out inside someone’s mind to post this type of bile. It doesn’t even seem possible, it seems like some sort of a caricature of a human. To try to even put myself in his shoes and picture what went through his mind at the moment is… impossible. I’ve been angry, I’ve been a dickish when I’ve been angry, but this is in a completely different ballpark.
This is the exact same way as I feel when I see angry religious people rioting over someone “disrespecting” their beliefs. I just… I can’t understand it. I try. I’d like to know what’s going through their heads, if only because it’s easier to deal with a problem when you understand everyone’s point-of-view. Try as I might, I just can’t do it.
Well where can I get a copy of the feminist manifesto, because here I was all these years advocating that the social, political, and all other rights of women should be equal to those of men, only to find out I may not be a feminist.
Are fuckwits seriously saying that apart from denying the existence of triggering and then taunting a rape victim to make them trigger that awful experience, other than that one little thing, TJ is a tireless feminist deeply concerned about equal rights for all sexes?
Come the fuck off it.
I suppose the BNP is one of the top groups fighting against racism. You know, when they are not engaged in racist fear-mongering?
@datasolution
PZ is just bashing TJ because he is jealous? Christ, are all of TJ’s supporters this bloody thick?
Dr. Audley:
Sorry. I guess I’m too old for that. That’s what I gather from comments up-thread, I reckon.
Oh shit the sexism thread has filled up once more. Just in case you’re reading this far down: as an originally reluctant and conversationally emphatic feminist I am putting sexual control in the hands of my girlfriend by attempting to assauge her 24-7 lustiness as best as my genitals or digits are capable of. It’s almost awkward.
mikepaps:
Oh, yes of course! How silly of me not to realize that the man who raped me and many other women was a feminist, because after all, he left all of three of us alive!
Well, Mike, you certainly never have to worry about anyone mistaking you for a decent human being.
I can’t even facepalm hard enough.
How can a rapist respect equal rights for women?
I’m sorry, I’m so gobsmacked by this fucking stupidity that I can’t string a coherent statement together. I’ll try again later.
mikepaps:
Dude, then you should be aware that a feminist does not advocate rape. A feminist does not fucking threaten rape. Period. End of story.
How can you seriously say TAA is a feminist when he did these exact things? Are you fucking stupid? Yet here you are, defending these exact statements by claiming TAA really isn’t misogynistic, even though his words fucking prove that he is.
A rapist can be a feminist? Really?
You are contemptible.
Y’know mikepaps, if you can’t actually be a decent human being, the least you could do is shut your pie-hole and not give anyone reason to believe the contrary.
Just some advice, if you ever find yourself with an urge to say stupid things again. I’m not trying to stifle your first amendment rights at all.
I’m calling for him to be shunned because he vividly described how he’d like someone to be raped. I never excused “IcumwhenIkillmen” as harmless sarcasm. I have consistently argued against uncivil abusiveness on all sides of all issues. I have written numerous posts calling for atheists not to use abusive language towards the religious, for example.
What TJ Kincaid did is TJ Kincaid’s fault. There is no provocation which warrants his response, just as there is no provocation which warrants a disgusting “IcumwhenIkillmen” handle. They’re both awful. They’re both from people who should be held accountable for their own actions. This is not a schoolyard, we should be beyond accepting “He started it” as an excuse.
If you determine that a person is lying about their experiences, then empathy would dictate that you put yourself in the shoes of someone who would lie about their personal experiences. That’s all. Nothing to do with “deserving” anything. Having empathy simply means you are capable of imagining another person’s feelings and thought process. It doesn’t mean you have to sympathize with them, condone what they do, or support them. Like I said, you obviously have a very loose grasp on the meaning of the word “empathy.”
Maybe this hypothetical rapist rapes men and women equally.
I’d love to hear mikepaps’ explanation of how a participant in a lynching is not necessarily racist.
Ace of Sevens:
Touché.
I’m not sure if the fact I’ve heard people actually make this argument makes better or worse.
I guess the explaination is going to include “intent” and “magic” – but not the customary “not fucking”.
Ace of Sevens:
I know that was tongue in cheek but…
BARF!
Maybe he only rapes when he gets angry.
SallyStrange: I suppose one could argue crowd mentality etc. but I wouldn’t believe it.
A. R:
You have a proposal or something to write. What are you doing here?
nigel: Taking a break/distraction moment, Drosophila literature can be supremely boring at times, especially when all you want is a single protein’s interaction profile.
Nigel:
Oh come on. You’re not that much older than I am!
HEY EVERYBODY DID YOU KNOW THAT =8)-DX HAS A GIRLFRIEND AND THEY HAVE SEX AND STUFF? NO, REALLY, HE’S NOT A VIRGIN, HE HAS SEX SOMETIMES. THAT’S REALLY IMPORTANT FOR YOU TO KEEP IN MIND.
Sally Strange:
Oh, you know, they were just carried away with the
mobcrowd, the spirit of the thing, it didn’t matter if the person being lynched was black or anything, their intentions and all were good and you shouldn’t judge them!!1!Good post:
https://proxy.freethought.online/nataliereed/2012/02/08/mra-gets-around/
Audley:
Heh, I’m the same age as PZ and according to several of the idiots in this thread, incapable of understanding the language (and the layers of it) of the youtubers.
That was amazingly on-point, but I’m all out of Internets.
The caps should have been a good hint that clicking Ms Daisy Cutters youtube link was a bad idea.
Dr. Audley:
Hm. How old am I?
Hell, I guess I’ll be 45 soon. That makes me far too old for herp a derp. I think there’s some internet rules, regulations, by-laws, and general understandings that lay that out.
This, combined with “You don’t know they wouldn’t have lynched a white guy under similar circumstances,” is an argument I’ve seen seriously proffered.
Oh, come on, Gnumann. How can you not like a video and song from the creators of “Dick in a Box”?
Ms Daisy Cutter:
I Just Had Sex is one of my favorite all-time songs. (I like the live version better, just ‘cos Akon looks like he’s having the time of his life.)
continuation from #412…
I usually don’t watch TJ’s videos because they piss me off, like South Park, which is why I don’t watch that either. Still, both TJ and SP have some videos that are worth watching. Some of their videos just plain suck.
I originally came here years ago looking for arguments against intelligent design. I think need to start looking elsewhere. This blog has changed. It has become ugly and depressing.
Feeling alone again, and very sad.
The internet is not a different universe.
If you’re an asshole on the internet, you’re just an asshole, period.
It is somewhat in dispute. Some call it an adaptive immunological response, some call it “autotune allergy”.
Egad, y’all, stop depressing me! I never thought you could muster up racist-denialist lynching apologia with such speed and facility.
Ace of Sevens:
*Sigh* I often wonder about those who attempt to defend the indefensible. I wish I didn’t wonder about it as often as I do.
mikepaps:
I realize you’ve probably left the building due to the intense spanking you’ve received, but this just requires another go-round. I’d give apologies to Jeff Foxworthy if only he were fucking funny.
You might not be a feminist if you condone threatening rape.
You might not be a feminist if you make apologies for people who intentionally use rape-ptsd-triggers as a taunt.
You might not be a feminist if you let misogynist statements go by without comment.
You might not be a feminist if you think The Guyz are at a political, legal, or social disadvantage.
You might not be a feminist if you claim rapists can be feminists.
This pretty much sums up the problem here, clueless out of touch pseudo-intellectual uppity audience.
Along with the incredibly stupid statements and attitudes about Pat Condell. What kind of incurious deluded idiot you have to be to not be an islamophobe??
datasolution:
Wut.
SC, over on another thread, you were wondering if this charmer was a neo-nazi. I think you may have been on to something.
Seriously, wut?
a3kr0n:
Oh FFS, go elsewhere then. It’s not as if you bother to contribute here and so far, in this thread, the only thing you want is pats on the head for hanging on that cross.
Pharyngula has changed, yes, but not all that much. It’s become a stronger, better, safer place. You wanted to defend a person who thinks it’s okay to repeatedly threaten someone with rape. You wanted to defend a person who thinks it’s okay to trigger victims. No one is stopping you from watching his videos, or thinking he’s a great guy. Think it all you fucking want, say it all you want. You simply won’t find a whole lot of agreement here.
By the way, the internet is full of ugly. So is reality. Best of luck in avoiding it, Cupcake.
datasolutions:
Riiiight. We haven’t heard of one mentally-underpowered fuckwit among tens of thousands on youtube, and we’re just clueless out-of-touch pseudo-intellectual uppity folks. That makes perfect sense.
So, you’re an Islamophobe? And what are your reasons for irrational fear of Muslims, exactly?
The non-racist kind.
“Islamophobe” in this context is a synomnym for racist. The reason for using “islamophobe” instead of “racist” in this context is two-fold:
1: The attitudes in question relates to delutions of monolithic religious unity and a reified concept of “Islam” rather than a delution of race.
And more importantly
2: If you use “racist” some sop will do the “This can’t be racist, Islam isn’t a race”-canard (blissfully ignoring that there is no valid concept of human races)
No, Cupcake. The problem is ignorant asspimples who think their various hatreds and fears are perfectly okay and actually reasonable and rational. You’re just one of many bigoted fuckwits, groping about awkwardly in the darkness, looking for anyone or anything that will tell you that you’re okay.
You aren’t.
“Uppity.”
I don’t know, why don’t you ask Crommunist?
So yeah TAA is backing down from the posts and not continuing the fight. So hopefully this doesn’t turn into another never ending shitstorm.
http://www.formspring.me/amazingatheist/q/291727923700826741?utm_medium=social&utm_source=twitter&utm_campaign=shareanswer&_sg=&_sk=
Caine:
The biggest change I’ve seen since become a regular has been the greater focus on society in general. There’s a lot less mention of creationism and so on, most definitely. But the spotlight on general social health issues, such as feminism, indicates to me a greater breadth of social awareness.
Sniping at creationists is a bit like bobbing for apples with a shotgun. It’s just too fucking easy these days. It’s the same old story, over and over. We all know the schoolyard rules, the games, the way the popular kids will pick on the smarter kids. When it’s brought up, it’s only us beating up on what amounts to punk-ass kids on a playground. There’s no challenge or reward to it anymore, other than their lunch money.
Bring up things like Libertarianism or misogyny, though, and you bring out all kinds of half-wits who think they’re rational and logical and, especially, free thinkers, defending the indefensible. It not only makes for lots of page impressions, but for good drama, and even better, something for us to make our teeth all sniny again.
Creationists are too fucking easy. Dealing with the darkness at the heart of free thinking, though — that’s a challenge.
For those interested in the ongoing reddit drama, some long introspection by one of the “shitredditsays” sub-reddits on the use of the username “ICumWhenIKillMen”
http://www.reddit.com/r/SRSDiscussion/comments/pge3g/id_like_sort_of_an_explanation_of_todays_theme/
The user in questions says :
“I’m not real good at serious discussions so I’m just saying this: following statements that my username is triggering, relayed to me by the Archangelles, I’m mostly phasing this account out (per request).”
friedandburnt:
So what? It doesn’t erase them or the damage he did.
What fight? He spent time threatening people. That’s not a fight, that’s not an argument, that’s not a discussion. It’s an asshole issuing threats.
So yeah TAA is backing down
meh, kinda
I think, through his protestations otherwise, that the only reason he’s apologizing is because now people are wondering why he is still blogging at all… and he considers blogging his livelihood.
*shrug*
#509:
Hee hee. Yeah. Couldn’t possibly be that, oh, I don’t know, PHYSICAL ABUSE IS A FREQUENT CAUSE OF DIVORCE. Nope.
I’m sure you are right, but from personal experience I can assure you that false accusations of assault occur during divorces, although I have no idea how often.
Of course this is my personal anecdote, and sample of one…
During my separation my ex reported me to the police with a completely fabricated accusation of assault, after assaulting me by digitally raping me in circumstances where I was unable to defend myself or call for help. Oh – I’m a bloke, by the way.
friedandburnt:
That’s good to hear. It’s just terribly sad he thought it a good fight to begin with.
It seems he has a whole fuck-ton of reconciliation before he reaches the point where he doesn’t deserve a shitstorm. His words were not just hurtful, but harmful. He intentionally caused pain to another person. This wasn’t an argument over ideology. It was someone intentionally being cruel to someone for a traumatic experience.
Thanks for the update.
“What fight?”
This entire back and forth over what he said.
Okay, as a card carrying kinky person who enjoys being beaten and humiliated, I have a few observations:
A) Some small fraction of submissive men can and do rape or otherwise assault their partners.
B) There is a non-trivial number of submissive men who only care about their kinks and needs being met and not those of their Dominant. These are the type that give submissive men in the scene a bad reputation.
C) More than a few submissive men are still flaming misogynist douchebags who fetishize Dommes and don’t see them as real people. Fewer than the number of Doms who do the same to their female submissives but it still happens frequently.
This isn’t to say I don’t know any great submissive men, I certainly do and happily more of them than the douchebag variety. However those bad apples make finding a good submissive just as risky as finding a good Dominant.
The hallmark of a good apology is always making excuses for your behavior.
Nigel:
QFMFT. The creationists/IDists, all of them, it’s easy fodder. Easily refuted, easily demolished. I love the way Pharyngula has changed, I love more focus on social issues and I ferociously love Pharyngula being a safe harbor for so many.
Well. I admit I was expecting a pretty ridiculous answer, but this might be the dumbest thing I have ever read.
“His words were not just hurtful, but harmful. He intentionally caused pain to another person.”
The person on the receiving end, by his own admission, was not hurt.
And TJ honestly did not intend to trigger because he didn’t think that was a thing.
Not saying that makes it OK. It’s still unacceptable because It “was someone intentionally being cruel to someone ”
and because it might’ve been hurtful.
Here’s what he wrote:
Frankly, I don’t care. “I was really mad when I threatened to rape you” is not much of an excuse. Anyone who says shit like that is permanently filed in the “Do not trust and never be alone with” category. Plenty of people manage to get furiously angry without issuing rape threats. I’d have to see some serious amends-making, like volunteering at a rape crisis center for example, before I changed that assessment.
What kind of incurious deluded idiot you have to be to not be an islamophobe??
I’m curious, dorksolution, exactly how *much* time did you spend today cowering in fear of the religion of Islam?
or, if implied, and you really mean “muslims”, then how much time did you avoid writing or doing work because of that fear?
I’m guessing, zero.
zero.
so, uh, can you really consider yourself an islamophobe, or are you really just an ignorant bigoted asswipe?
because so far, all your posts suggest the latter.
meant to say it might’ve been triggering.
As I said, it wasn’t a fight. It was an asshole threatening people and doing actual damage. It was not an argument, fight or discussion.
You are an idiot, that has to be the lamest, most nonsensical justification of stupidity I ever saw.
And bringing in the “islam is not monolithic”…oh for fuck sake, I don’t even know what to say to that, you are completely irrelevant.
“It was not an argument, fight or discussion.”
I meant the back and forth that happened after it.
And you guys realize that in context these were not serious threats right?
(Not saying that makes it Ok but a lot of people seem to think he was serious about it).
The person on the receiving end, by his own admission, was not hurt.
how do you know that person wasn’t just covering?
in fact, it’s entirely irrelevant.
why?
because the problem is more than just fuckwit says “IWILLRAPEU” it’s that fuckwit said it PUBLICLY.
which, if nothing else, suggests he isn’t as smart as he pretends to be, let alone completely uncomprehending of the fact that other people, reading that, might also be hurt, even if it wasn’t directed at them.
You know, this would have been a great time to simply point his ass at Phill’s “Don’t be a Dick” speech, since it has now found an actual target audience.
In other words, it’s completely true that Islam isn’t a monolith, and you have no way to contradict this statement. So, declare your interlocutor to be irrelevant! Case closed. Who could argue with such airtight logic?
Sally Strange:
Oh no. No, no, no. Anyone who thinks it was perfectly okay to issue threats of rape and to continue triggering a victim has no business anywhere near a rape crisis center.
Sorry, but as someone who spent years as an advocate, I don’t want someone like this anywhere near victims. It’s obvious that somewhere within himself, he doesn’t see much problem with what he said or did. He doesn’t even realize the damage he did. There’s no fucking way I’d let him anywhere near a victim.
Caine:
I came here from the Rational Responders website. That was the first place I found where I felt a kinship (other than Slashdot, of course). But there was something missing that I found here, right around the time of Crackergate. Part of it was the immense pleasure in being around fearsomely educated people. Another part was the thought that I was doing something.
Since then, I feel like I’ve grown up, in a strange way. And all these folks complaining about how Pharyngula has changed make me realize it’s not just me that’s grown up, but that I’ve grown up with the people around me. We’re still doing something, but we’re doing something even more important. We’re not just addressing the flaws in other groups, but in us.
That’s tough. Some might see it as turning against each other. Even others might think that we’re only attacking others because they’re part of our in-group. And it just isn’t true.
I think we’re doing it because it’s right. And not just “right” as in, “Written down somewhere.” But demonstrably and defensibly right.
Yeah, well you go like this: “dih dah dur duh dar dar dar.”
I have always enjoyed reasoned discourse.
And you guys realize that in context these were not serious threats right?
the context was there for all to see.
and yet, it took exactly how much post-hoc explanation to “explain” the *larger* context?
yeah.
fail.
In fact, if it was an issue of pure context, the very FIRST thing out of his mouth should have been explaining that, instead of trying to defend it as it stood and basically admonishing everyone else who took offense to what he said, which is basically what he did before changing tactics.
nope, sorry, he could have headed off this shitstorm easily.
he didn’t.
complete fail.
good he’s apologizing now, at least kinda, but it was still an epic fail.
Beat me to it.
#575 SallyStrange: Please no. This guy should not be going anywhere near a rape crisis center.
If he wants to make amends he could donate some money to a rape crisis center, anonymously.
#580 friedandburnt: What do you mean they were not serious threats? They were meant to be threatening. Sure, he was presumably not planning to carry them out, but they were still threatening. Sometimes the threat is enough, and that’s why threats alone are a crime (assault).
A robber can point a gun at the teller and demand money, but not intend to actually fire the gun. In fact, the gun might not even be loaded. Or he can just hand over a piece of paper saying “I’ve got a gun.” It’s still a serious threat.
This is as close to that as you can get on the Internet, and if you’re suggesting that it’s somehow not serious, you’re absolutely nutso.
#587: Looks like she beat me to it too.
I don’t even know what to say
In your case, saying nothing would be the best solution.
as in, run along and play somewhere else, because you’re both pedantic and puerile.
and boring, in case it wasn’t clear.
mikepaps,
NO COOKIES FOR YOU!
Seriously, in what way is “your triggers are your fucking problem, not mine” a non-assholish point of view?
So, you’ve now decided to go full court stupid? First of all, there is no way to know if a person issuing a threat is serious or not. As I said before, people have been stalked on the ‘net and that stalking has gone into meatspace. Ask Aquaria about that. Or you could ask me.
You have zero business saying that threatening someone on the net is harmless or meaningless. You simply have no way of knowing and there is simply no reason, whatsoever, to defend anyone who makes such threats.
So, apparently a monolith has at least two major fractions very keen on wilding each other off the face of the earth. A very strange usage of that word I might say. I can’t quite remember to have heard that one before, but English is not my first language.
Is it the same kind of English as the kind where “rapist” means “feminist”?
friedandburnt:
Nobody said he was actually going to follow through on the threats. That does not mean they weren’t serious. And that right there is the difference between people who make those sorts of threats, and those who don’t.
Listen: it makes no difference whether he was serious or not. What matters is, he thought it was OK to say it in the first place. His words didn’t really hurt the person on the receiving end? Oh, then, it’s just like he didn’t say it in the first place. Right?
I mean, he doesn’t really taunt victims of rape with further rape when he’s not angry. So he must really looooove us. He’s such a nice guy if only you get to know him.
Forgive me if I find this rationale somehow lacking. My sister said the same things before her boyfriend beat the living fuck out of her and left her for dead.
I do wish people would collectively settle on an ad hom. I’m an uneducated academic intellectual pseudo-intellectual elite loser slutty prude uppity conformist liberal authoritarian artsy hyper-rational extremist. You know – everything I write is just propaganda for that perspective.
I’m late to the discussion here… but it’s true, and important to reiterate, that Pat Condell is a racist asshole, and the same is true of that portion of the atheist community which espouses similarly rabid anti-Muslim views.
To take just one example. In his video “Goodbye Sweden”, he says “no country has done more to embrace the multicultural nightmare… I mean dream… than Sweden”; accuses the Swedish government of trying to “wipe their culture clean out of existence”, and asserts that it’s “now unconstitutional to uphold Swedish values in Sweden”. (What the fuck are “Swedish values”?) He goes on to allege that immigrants are responsible for an increase in rapes in Sweden, saying that Sweden is now “the rape capital of Europe” and explicitly linking this to “immigrant Islamic culture”. And he’s also said:
This is indistinguishable from the kind of rhetoric we’re used to seeing from far-right anti-immigration activists like Geert Wilders or Nick Griffin. Like them, Condell has a classic xenophobic agenda of keeping Muslims and “Muslim culture” out of Western countries. The fact that he supports UKIP, a nationalistic party with a strong anti-immigration policy, is entirely consistent with this.
The pretence of caring about women’s rights is just a convenient rhetorical ploy. If the xenophobes actually cared about the human rights of Muslim women, the last thing they would be doing is supporting restrictive immigration laws in Western countries, which make it harder for women oppressed under theocratic régimes to leave their countries and seek asylum in the West. (Anti-immigration laws, and the private security industry employed to enforce them, come at a terrible human cost for refugees and asylum-seekers.) Nor would they be joining with other far-right voices to drum up irrational opposition to the so-called “Ground Zero mosque” (actually a Muslim community centre, and not actually at Ground Zero, but facts have never been much of an issue for the hatemongers). The agenda of Condell and his ilk has never been about human rights; it’s been about cultural hegemony, and keeping “foreigners”, with their culture and religion, out of “our” countries. In other words, the same old racist nativist agenda that the far right has always espoused; Islam simply happens to be this decade’s convenient bogeyman.
It’s also true that until quite recently, Pat Condell was celebrated within much of the atheist community in Britain – the National Secular Society in Britain has promoted his views – and has been praised and defended by Richard Dawkins.
“First of all, there is no way to know if a person issuing a threat is serious or not.”
You’ve lost your license to call anyone stupid after making such a dumbass comment. There’s these magical things called context and tone that can be used to determine what someone meant. Look them up sometime.
“You have zero business saying that threatening someone on the net is harmless or meaningless.”
I never said they were meaningless or harmless just that he wasn’t being serious. Please take the time to find out what words mean.
Also, I noticed on one of the Manboobz threads where Rutee has been active, that Lorrdernie (the target of TAA aka terroja’s abuse) received a private apology from him, and when he was asked to make it a public apology, the guy refused: “I don’t normally let other people bully me into doing what they want. Sorry, but a private apology is the best I’m willing to do. I have already publicly stated that what I said was wrong.”
Not impressive.
“Oh, then, it’s just like he didn’t say it in the first place. Right?”
Are you having fun arguing with your straw man?
Sorry guys, that was an idiotic suggestion. I didn’t think it through all the way. All I meant to say was that a mere apology (especially one that includes the bullshit “I was real mad” excuse) is just not going to cut it for moving TAA out of the vitriolic, untrustworthy, possibly dangerous misogynist category.
friedandburnt:
Uhm, you might actually want to investigate this a little more. There are plenty of instances in which on-line altercations turned serious. From the context I read, it’s fucking impossible to determine whether TAA might actually follow through or not. He was fucking off the rails.
So… the context supports ambiguity in this case. And all you’re doing is apologizing for someone who fucking threatened to rape someone.
friedandburnt:
What strawman? That was your suggestion. “Oh, the target didn’t really get hurt, so it’s not as bad as all that.”
There’s no strawman here. There’s just you defending someone who attacked a rape victim with further threats of rape.
Thing is, this is not a situation where the overwhelming-majority of what a person acts like outweighs the few times they slip up. Nobody just oops-es their way into sustained, vicious rape threats. In the overwhelming majority of cases, when a person slips up and shows blatant misogyny, it later proves to be just the tip of a very ugly iceberg. These attitudes are extremely common, and almost always, they’re hidden behind a facade of respectability.
I want to reply to this. I really really do.
BUT! I have absolutely no fucking idea what the hell datasolution is trying to say. I’ve read and re-read this post (I even read it aloud once!) and I still can’t figure out what datadouche is arguing for. Or possibly against.
And Gnumann is irrelevant to what?
I would give up my gold tooth for a troll (just one!) with decent communication skillz. So far, not so much.
Really, datasolution, why should rational people be Islamophobes? Can you answer that one simple question clearly?
Philip Legge (quoting a douchecanoe):
Oh, for fuck’s sake. That is the most pathetic excuse for not apologizing I’ve ever seen. “Yeah, I attacked you in public, I humiliated you in public, but I’m not apologizing in public. I’ll just admit that I was wrong.”
This TAA person gets more despicable by the moment.
Right. Because “I am going to make you a rape victim if you don’t fuck off. I am going to rape you with my fist” is so full of nuance and subtlety that anyone who misses the greater context is just shallow and lazy.
If anyone thinks that TAA is even slightly apologetic, read all the crap he’s tweeting/retweeting on twitter.
e.g from @NicoIsCrazy
@amazingatheist Hey just wanted you to know that you’re fucking awesome and that all of these butthurt moralfags can go fuck a dead moose.
from @Nick_Saris
@amazingatheist If your rape rant was on 4chan, no one would’ve given a shit. Leave Redditt. It’s a shitty site for fools and cunts.
http://twitter.com/amazingatheist
@Audley: I would guess you can find a lot of what he’s arguing for by googling “eurabia” (not that I reccomend it)
Audely: It’s true, many of the seem-to-be trolls with a decent grasp of communication tend to come over to our side. (Perhaps it’s because they are vulnerable to reasoned argument)
Gnumann:
Aaaaand, I should have listened to you. Blech.
But at least things are starting to make a little bit of sense now.
There was a time I had hope for humanity. Fuckwits like TAA and his sycophants like crecy, datasolutions, and friedandburnt make me realize, there will never be someone so blatantly narcissistic and hateful that won’t have a whole posse of apologists.
Oh, and A. R: quit slacking. Get back to work.
“What strawman?”
The one I was quoting.
““Oh, the target didn’t really get hurt, so it’s not as bad as all that.””
Nice backtrack, you were saying that I thought “Oh, then, it’s just like he didn’t say it in the first place.”
Which I never said. I explicitly fucking said it was unacceptable at 574. If you want to pretend I didn’t then you might as well just talk to yourself.
Here you can grab a sock, write my name on it and argue with it in the mirror if you like.
My father was very much the gun enthusiast. He started drilling gun safety to me before I can even remember. These were the first two and the most important two.
First, when someone hands you a gun, check to see if the safety is on or off and if the gun is loaded.
Second, you never aim at a person unless you are going to shoot. You do not know how the other person might react to a threat. And that person will be justified in defending them self.
So what if the person issuing the threat does not intend on carrying through with it, the person receiving the threat has no way of knowing and every right to defend them self.
Hey Nigel can you fucking read? I’ve always maintained that what he said was unacceptable, even though I think he wasn’t being serious.
Ugh. These people are vile.
I don’t have anything much to add to the discussion, other than… ugh. I’ve seen plenty of industrial-grade misogyny in my time on the internet, but I think TAA’s rant is probably the worst yet.
Walton, sadly, that is not even close to the worst.
Oh please drunk people fighting on the internet in the middle of the night will say anything. Of course it’s possible that brings out his true nature
how’s that old saying go?
In vino, veritas?
friedandburnt:
Of course you said it was unacceptable. But.
Let me quote everything you said in #574:
The very first fucking sentence implies the original hateful statements caused no harm, and so were not a big deal. And then you say that TJ didn’t mean to trigger. Why the fuck would that even matter in this context?
It wasn’t that it “might’ve been hurtful.” From the very first sentence of this post, you’re essentially saying, “Well, TJ didn’t mean to be cruel, though he was kinda dickweedish about the whole thing, and it’s not excusable, but the person on the receiving end wasn’t hurt.”
The implication of what you said here, and pretty much every fucking post after, is that TJ isn’t that bad of a guy. The words he said really don’t reflect the facts.
And if that isn’t what you meant, you might consider avoiding the weaselish wording. You might consider a more outright condemnation.
I stand by my interpretation of this post. If you meant to say that fortunately the victim appears to not have been too badly hurt by TJ’s completely vile and abhorrent behavior, you might consider not couching it in such fucking weasilish and apologetic a manner.
friedandburnt:
Of course I can fucking read. You keep saying what he said was unacceptable, but you keep making fucking excuses. You are an apologist for a person who makes threats of rape, even if you don’t agree with what he said.
I get it.
There’s these magical things called context and tone that can be used to determine what someone meant.
wait… I’ve heard that before.
AH! I have it! That’s what all the biblical apologists tell us about how they can determine the parts of the bible that are supposed to be literal from those that aren’t.
yeah… didn’t work out too well for them as an argument, either.
try again?
“The very first fucking sentence implies the original hateful statements caused no harm,”
Correct.
“and so were not a big deal.”
Which is why I explicitly stated it was a big deal because that statement sort of implied it.
“Why the fuck would that even matter in this context?”
I fucking said later that it was terrible because it might’ve been hurtful. That whole post was basically “he did not have malicious intent”, and that’s it. I never said that it makes it OK.
“You might consider a more outright condemnation.”
I think he meant no harm and I don’t think it caused harm and yet I will still condemn it anyway. I condemn it because it goes past uncalled for into “what the hell is wrong with you” territory.
friedandburnt,
Of course it has caused harm. He has given voice to a legion of fuckwits who stand by what he said.
See post #607 for a taster.
it’s round about this time that I think it would be a good idea to recommend to ol’ f&b here some places that detail what not to do when one finds ones-self in a hole.
I know what they mean, Cupcake. It’s rather obvious you don’t, when you say that the rape threats weren’t meaningless and were harmful, but not…serious.
Honestly, you’re an idiot and surprise, surprise, yet another defender of those who make rape threats.
friedandburnt:
Y’know, I think I know the bit that pisses me off about the post I quoted.
It doesn’t matter if he thought “triggers” were real things or not. And that’s the crux of your defense that you “think he meant no harm.” How can you not know that it’s cruel to taunt someone over a traumatic experience? How could you possibly think you were not being cruel when you taunt someone with their own fucking rapist?
It’s not just that what he said was mean. It’s that you’re trying to defend him by saying you think he meant no harm. How can you even begin to think that? He fucking said he wanted to give the rapist a medal. How is that not intentionally intending harm?
No. He meant harm. He intended to hurt, to humiliate, to use the very power of rape over the person he attacked. Whatever the outcome might be, whether the victim was really hurt or not, doesn’t matter. TAA said those things with intent to hurt, with full knowledge that he intended to hurt.
I wanted to apologize for misunderstanding you. I wrote a whole post apologizing, and trying to dissect where our communication fell apart. And in that dissection, I realized the problem wasn’t in communication, but in the fact that you are apologizing for TAA.
He intended to cause harm. It might be hard for you to accept, but those threats of rape were intentional and targeted. His words were carefully selected to cause mental anguish in another person.
You can denounce those words all you want. But as long as you claim, “He didn’t mean it,” you’re fucking apologizing for someone who intended to inflict mental pain.
And I can’t accept that. And I certainly won’t fucking apologize for it.
It seems I contradicted myself, the words were not harmful but they could’ve been.
“I know what they mean, Cupcake”
Then use them, try to figure out how they apply in every day situations. Is that too hard for you Sweetie?
friedandburnt:
It’s not just that they could’ve been. They were meant to be harmful. And in that way, they were very serious. And intended to be serious.
I hate people so so very much right now.
I totally want to apologize to most religious people now. TAA is the top face of net atheism? No wonder they think we deserve hell.
Yeah, everything TAA said was meant to be harmful. If it wasn’t, then it was merely by the purest good fortune.
Clarification: I mean “if it wasn’t harmful then it was merely by the purest good fortune.”
Hmm. The Twitter stream that psycholist referred to is awful for yet another reason: idiots on Twitter are making all sorts of threats back at TJ Kincaid, allowing him to take on the mantle of “victim”. He’s retweeting the worst ones. (Sometimes I really want to give up on the human race altogether, and sink into total misanthropy…)
For example: a blogger somewhere was apparently so angered by TJ’s tirade that he posted a comment hoping that someone would “drop docs” on TJ, allowing someone else to commit arson and burn down the guy’s house. TJ screen caps that, whacks it on his tumblr and Twitter, and cue “woe is me!” Internet drama.
Oh no, you don’t get away with this crap. The words were not only harmful, they were meant to cause harm, right from the get go. You going to stop with defending the indefensible yet, or continue to defend an utter asspimple who thinks it’s perfectly okay to issue rape threats?
I’m guessing declare victory, then leave.
Nigel, you’re right he probably was meaning to hurt someone.
I retract that part.
SallyStrange @ 600:
A Clenched Tentacle Salute to you, for showing how thinking adults behave.
friedandburnt:
I’m giving you the benefit of the doubt, even if I am not sure you deserve it. You’ve spent a lot of effort here defending TAA, while simultaneously saying you disagree with what he said. That’s fine. I even respect that, in a weird, respect-the-first-amendment way.
I would like you to consider how you appear here, among us. Rape is not only a serious issue, but the use of threats of rape as intimidation is also a serious issue. TAA first threatened rape to someone he thought a woman. This exposes a huge misogynist streak. There’s no other explanation: TAA thinks so poorly of women that he would use the threat of rape as an intimidation tactic. So while he might not have been serious about actually raping someone, he was fucking serious about the threat. It wasn’t playful. It wasn’t a joke. It was using a real social issue to silence someone with whom he had an altercation.
Think about what that means. Think about what kind of person TAA has to be to do that.
Think about what you’re trying to defend.
I have to go to bed. I’m getting up in 5.5 hours to go to the gym. I’ve already sacrificed sleep over this issue. I did that because I think this is important. And unlike the other TAA apologists in this thread, I think you have at least half a brain.
So I’m appealing to you not in the hopes of winning an argument, but in the hope that you might begin to understand. TAA might not have meant to follow through on actual rape. But that does not mean the threat of rape wasn’t serious. It was entirely serious. It was targeted to cow an opponent, an opponent TAA thought was female. It’s not only a cheap shot, but a hateful maneuver.
And TAA’s actions after just further illustrate his real character. And it ain’t pretty.
I’m heading to bed, leaving you with this single appeal: consider what you’re defending. Ask yourself if it’s really worth defending. Nobody’s threatening TAA’s free speech. That would be worth defending, and I’d be right there with you.
No. What your’e defending is TAA’s honor. What kind of honor does a person have, who will threaten a person with rape as a tactic in argument, and then continue to taunt that person once it’s discovered they’re a rape victim? What kind of person is that, really?
Anyway, I have to go to bed. I hope you really consider what it is you’re defending here, what it is you are arguing for.
But it did cause harm. Threats of sexual violence, whatever the real intention behind them, cause harm in themselves – both immediate emotional harm to the person threatened, and the wider social harm of creating a hostile climate in which violent, hateful rhetoric is used to intimidate people into silence. (The use of rape threats to intimidate and silence female bloggers is a very real and scary phenomenon.)
Threatening someone with sexual violence, or physical violence of any sort, is absolutely beyond the pale of civilized discourse. This shouldn’t even need to be said. I can’t think of any circumstance in which this kind of rhetoric could be justifiable. Let’s not treat it as though it were legitimate.
nigelTheBold, well said. Hope you have a good night’s sleep, too, after all this.
@363
Her definition of rape included people who were physically restrained and she left no room for masochists who were restrained by choice.
In fact she basically labeled all sadists in BDSM rape supporters later in the list.
It seems I contradicted myself, the words were not harmful but they could’ve been.
I can just see the top of your head at this point.
Nigel, you’re right he probably was meaning to hurt someone.
…and he finally drops the shovel. You’re still in that deep, deep hole though.
Thought I should mention the only reason I bring it up is that I have masochistic tendencies.
Thought I should mention the only reason I bring it up is that I have masochistic tendencies.
actually, you WOULD be doing better by hitting yourself in the head with that shovel as opposed to continue digging with it.
friedandburnt @ 639, so now you’re going back way upthread to find ways to defend TAA and his rape threats, rather than respond to posts addressed specifically to you?
Real nice. Just what we need, acres more of apologia for a festering asspimple who thinks rape threats and taunting a rape victim are just hunky dory things to do.
In case you missed it, one of the points of Giliell’s post was that TAA is incredibly vague to begin with on the issue of rape, barely conceding that fucking an unconscious person is rape.
…what, you’ve never had a surprise boner while writing on the blackboard in class?
Azkyroth:
Gee, that was ever so helpful, thanks so much. Idiot*.
*If your comment was sarcasm, it was complete fail. It’s bad enough we’re infested with rape apologists, here you are giving the morons ammo, or so they think. Makes the rest of us have to work 10 times harder.
thecalmone @567: I gotta ask. Does it bother you at all that your anecdote accomplishes nothing at all in this thread except to prop up the argument of someone whose claim, essentially, is that a significant number of domestic violence charges are fabricated by women who want a divorce for no reason except that they’re castrating harpies and file bogus assault charges just to mess with their husbands?
That claim is not made by anyone decent, and if you think it even comes within shouting distance of a valid point then you’re not anyone decent either, regardless of what abuse you may personally have endured.
Thanks to Seriously? for pointing out this video on Lousy Canuck’s board. I never saw it, because I unsubbed before he made it. Apparently, gay kids who are bullied into suicide are pussies. The latest is hardly the worst he’s said. It’s just what finally got some public attention on him.
Ace of Sevens:
Oh, how lovely. Gee, that’s not at all filled with nasty gendered insults and biases, those stupid kids should simply harden up, grow some ballses and stop being stupid women, er, pussies. Yep. Gosh, I am all amazed how someone like that could turn around and issue rape threats. :eyeroll:
And to anyone defending his rant on feminism: it’s pretty clear that he spent a few hours looking around for the craziest person he could find, then presented her a representative feminist. The fact he managed to find a person who made really dubious claims is not a defense of his position. If a Christian said atheists were smug assholes and used TJ as their only example, we would call them out.
It is amazing to me how much hate one person can harbor. I would Godwin out, but I think there is a more important point – one that has been made thousands of times before – to be made: Atheists are not a monolithic group (get the reference). While you cannot be a rapist and a feminist, you can be a rapist, misogynist, homophobe, racist, misanthrope, and general sack of dried santorum, an d still be an Atheist. Atheist means the lack of belief in gods and nothing more.
oops, sacrifice to Typos, meant atheism, not atheist in that last sentence.
It’s obvious that he’s not apologizing because he’s genuinely remorseful, only to mitigate backlash. Just like any other public figure who has been caught misbehaving, he’s performing the required song-and-dance.
But someone who truly recognized the seriousness of threats like “I’m going to rape you with my fist” and “I will make you a rape victim” would apologize publicly, sincerely, and then keep a low profile for a while.
They would not – mere hours later – characterize their vicious threats in such casual terms as “saying some mean things on the Internet” or “something that chapped your ass” or a “minor transgression” or “I said something mean to a rape victim.”
Typical bullshit notpology. But it’s unsurprising, really – should we expect anything more from someone narcissistic enough to call themselves the “Amazing Atheist,” and reprehensible enough to threaten a rape victim with rape?
True:
At this point, it’s more than a notpology, it’s confirmation that he doesn’t think what he said and did was problematic in any way. Smart sleazebuckets at least issue the notpology and shut up for a while. This idiot can’t even manage that much, not even a pretense of understanding what he did.
The depth of stupidity and hatefulness is what is amazing, not TJ.
The explanation to TAA
Looks like TAA is doing some early spring cleaning. He’s deleted his reddit account. The comments are all still there, but with “deleted” for his username. Not that it matters, there are many many screenshots of his crap.
It also looks like he’s cleaned up his twitter feed too. He’s deleted the more egregious retweets of his supporters (including the examples I mentioned earlier), and generally cleaned up his feed.
Hey, maybe it will all just blow over now!
From his questions site:
Q: Why do you refuse to apologize for your revolting comments? Why not do it in public and show that you actually have a shred of decency? Why do you isolate yourself from the atheist community by being hateful?
A: At this point, any apology would just be chalked up to a cave-in to peer pressure. Such an apology would be hollow and ring false.
So he gets to use hypothetical persecution to weasel out of responsibility for his bad behavior. I’m impressed.
At this point, skepticism about the fact that misogyny is a problem in the atheist community, such as it is, can simply be laughed at rather than exhaustively debunked.
Silver linings…?
“639, so now you’re going back way upthread to find ways to defend TAA and his rape threats”
Try reading next time. What they posted had nothing to do with his rape threats.
“rather than respond to posts addressed specifically to you? ”
i did not have time to address or read that wall of text.
“barely conceding that fucking an unconscious person is rape.”
Except that’s fucking bullshit. Her definition of rape didn’t stop at unconscious and he never said it was vague because of the unconscious part. Go watch it yourself.
Combination of historical continuity and awareness that male privilege functions such that women’s concerns are easily sidelined unless they’re specifically invoked.
That said, I DO kinda wish a less easily misunderstood label had been selected.
I hate so many people in this thread. So hard. You know who you are.
Bastards.
SallyStrange:
I don’t think so. Look at all the people in this thread defending the issuing of rape threats, defending rape ‘jokes’ and so on. It’s still coming down to those evil, uppity feminazis (or radfems) being the cause of all this unnecessary fuss, oh yeah. Stupid fuckin’ bitches, if they’d get a sense of humour and believed in free speech, hey, everything would be copacetic, ya know.
Holy fucking Christ on a Stick Shit.
I need Vodka and orange juice.
Rapists could be feminists?
Feminism – radical notion women are equal and should be treated as such.
Not even the women raping a man by forcing him to penetrate her is a feminist. Not even if in her mind its “I’m a woman. Women are people too. Men are people who get to rape” justification.
Just like a fucking Islamophobe cannot be a humanist.
Its not fucking possible due to the fucking definition.
Seriously? My rapist could be a feminist?
Oh and for the asshat that brought up falsified domestic violence in child custody, fuck you. This is from an actual abuse victim who was told “But what if you are lying to get full custody?” to my face by the fucking judge. Who then went on when pointed to the numerous arrests (which I followed through on and he only got a shitty trpo, and probation), witnesses (one which was the sperm donor’s own mother) and photos, said “But what did you do to him? How do we know he wasn’t injured or that you didn’t start it? Where are the photos of his injuries?” And on and on and on. He would not accept any of it.
Wanna know why that shit happened? Jackasses like you who spout that bullfuckingshit. Just like rape apologist.
Go die in a goddamn fire.
What that rant was was TJ attacking a horrible human being a long time ago in something completely unrelated to this incident.
If you can get bent out of shape that someone’s using bullshit to defend a horrible person so can I.
Aw shit. Sorry for tag fail. >.<
What that rant was was TJ attacking a horrible human being a long time ago in something completely unrelated to this incident.
I’ll accept the idea that the person he was attacking was ahorrible human being, but this was about 3 months ago, not exactly a long time. Also, he wasn’t just attacking her. He was using as a straw-man to discredit feminists in general. That’s dishonest, at best.
forgot to add the blockquote
Rape apologist.
More to the point, it doesn’t matter if TJ was calling out horrible people and horrible behaviour every fucking day – it does not excuse his being a terrible person or his terrible behaviour, full stop.
@nigel
what exactly do you want me to say that I haven’t already said?
That he did something horrible and stupid, what?
I’m not defending his stuff out any respect for him, I was disagreeing with people over how bad it was. And now I’m disagreeing with people over something he said a long time ago, because the woman TJ attacking was a slimeball.
@667
So you agree that if a person is restrained they can’t consent to sex under any circumstances?
@668 I know but someone else brought up that other discussion.
You’re a rape apologist.
What people often miss in online discussions is that the anti-social, offensive, commenter might well suffer from an autism spectrum disorder, like Asperger syndrome.
These people can’t help themselves. They’re hard-wired to be tasteless and tactless. Some actually enjoy adoring fans who think they’re witnessing a great wit or insult artist. But in actuality, they simply don’t realize they’re impressed by a person with a neurological anomaly that renders them incapable of empathy or self control.
@671
Repeating yourself won’t make it true. Let me know when you have a point.
Oh, FUCK YOU. You insult our intelligence with the latest excuse-du-jour (“he’s autistic/spectrum-he doesn’t know any better!”) and you insult actual people with autism issues by equating them with fucking monsters.
Dude, fuck off. We’ve heard it all before. Tired, and offensive.
You’re a rape apologist, and a shithead. There isn’t anything more to say.
Oh hell fucking no. There are plenty of people with mental disabilities here, including autism. Do not pull that bullfuckingshit.
TJ’s behavior is hardly typical of autism anyway.
@675
You can’t even say why I’m a “rape apologist”. All you can do is keep repeating yourself. Moron.
jimashby:
Oh FFS, take this tired-ass shit and shove it. There are a whole lot of regular commenters here at Pharyngula who are on the autism spectrum. Not a single one of them lacks empathy or is unaware of how society works. As they often point out, they often know more than a neurotypical person when it comes to social cues and social situations and are less likely to make an ass out of themselves.
I am sick to death of morons such as yourself excusing utter asspimples by claiming “autism!!1!” or “socially awkward!1!!” Not only is it absolute shit, you’re insulting every single person on the autism spectrum along with every single person who may not be overwhelmingly social.
Understand something: I don’t give a flying fuck what you think of me, and neither does anyone worth hir weight in salt here. We’ve seen your bullshit before, for years, and years, and years. You’re just the latest incarnation of the Awww Shucks They Di’int Mean It They Was ‘Jes Sayin’ And Why You Gotta Be Hatin’ On People Central Casting
You know it’s sort of like … this reminds me of a convo I was having on Facebook. The context was a medical innovation by NASA. This guy I know said that we ought to fund the shit out of NASA. I replied, saying that we need to fund the shit out of DARPA, citing programs like Systems of Neuromorphic Adaptive Plastic Scalable Electronics (SyNAPSE), Biomimetic Computing, Deep Learning, etc. Right?
So eventually we get to this point, where I reply:
A world without obnoxious moralfags like PZ Myers or any of his regular commentators here is a world worth fighting for. And who knows? It could be only a few decades away.
For all you idiots who can’t read — I never said he has Aspergers or any other neurological anomaly. What I said is that it’s a potential in this situation . . . given his online persona. And IF he does suffer some disorder, then this whole uproar centers around something the offender does not control. In other words, it will accomplish nothing.
Ahem:
Central Casting™ stereotyped bullshitter.
@680
I’ve said numerous times that what he did to the rape victim was horrible. Are you even paying attention?
friedbrain:
Stop trying to make this into something concerning consensual sex practices. Stop trying to make this all about you. Stop defending a scumrag who thinks it is alright to threaten people with rape. Stop defending a scumrag who thinks it is alright to repeatedly bully, threaten and trigger a victim. At this point, you are every bit as despicable and contemptible as your little buddy.
You motherfucker.
Ultimate Weapons – X-47B
Swish that around in your mouth a bit. You know what taste is? Ineffectuality. With a bit of rape semen, for spice. Keep laboring under the delusion that your pious circlejerk is achieving anything.
I’ll just let PZ clean up the mess here. It is nice to know, however, whom to avoid online and in meatspace.
Aspergers is what it is. Some are worse off than others. I don’t give a flying fuck if you can’t accept the fact that IF somebody suffers from the disorder, he could very well display symptoms that perfectly mirror The Amazing Atheist. I’m not making an excuse for him UNLESS he actually does suffer Aspergers.
@caine
Just because he did that horrible insults doesn’t mean everything he did in the past 3 months was wrong and morally reprehensible.
He attacked someone with a vague definition of rape (what made it vague? probably the fact that consensual acts would fall under it), and with some other deplorable views. I’m not going to pretend that every bullshit criticism of him is valid just because he’s done something horrible.
I don’t do circlejerks.
jimashby:
What you said is the same tired, weak, stupid crap that’s dredged up by every fucking idiot out there when some asshole does something inexcusable.
We’ve heard it a thousand fucking times, if we’ve heard it once. Every other asshole said the same damn thing throughout elevatorgate. Oh, he’s probably Asperger’s or he’s socially awkward, or, or, or, or, or. No, Cupcake. He’s just another asspimple. Kind of like you are for even trotting out this crap.
As you can’t seem to manage not being incredibly insulting and offensive towards those who are on the spectrum, a good move would be to shut the fuck up. Idiot.
With projects like SyNAPSE coming to fruition, you can know that the following wish is quite sincere:
May the hunter-killer units of our military-industry complex one day work your little fingers down to the bone in a factory making weapons to kill your fellow human beings, Wernher von Braun-style.
And when they’re done with you and your body and labor are both spent, may they gouge out your eyeballs and skullfuck you.
Guess what, asspimple: plenty of people with Asperger’s got their whole lives without ever threatening to rape someone. So that’s not an excuse either, and you are full of shit.
I’d agree that the person TJ was going after in this video used way too broad a brush in claiming who was a rape supporter. By her definition, anyone who supports legalization of prostitution or porn is a rape supporter, for instance. Most of us on this board are pro-rape if her list is taken at face value.
Here’s the problem: (I’ll leave aside that a lot of his arguments are pretty bad.) TJ is straw-manning. He found a fringer, then implied she was a mainstream feminist. In fact, he straw mans the argument he’s actually responding to. He takes purposely takes her accusations of rape support and pretends they are accusations of actual rape to muddy the waters. He sure gets into a lot of misogynist language when responding as well, because that seems to be the only way he responds to women.
The bigger problem is that even if everything he said in this video from a few months ago were perfectly reasonable and defensible, that doesn’t make what he said Tuesday night any better. At best, this is a claim that sometimes he’s said things that weren’t rape-supporting. How is that a defense? If I were caught shoplifting, would getting a few people to testify that I paid for stuff at another store a few months ago help?
Josh:
No kidding. Fine examples of humanity we’re seeing.
Desire for avoidance by person A –> a wish for slavery and skull-fucking of Person A by Person B
Wow, you really are an acolyte of The Apalling Atheist.
Err, that should be, “a wish by Person B for the slavery and skull-fucking of Person A”
But you all get the idea.
“The bigger problem is that even if everything he said in this video from a few months ago were perfectly reasonable and defensible, that doesn’t make what he said Tuesday night any better.”
I know that, the only reason I mentioned it was because someone else brought it up.
They used that video to make a straw man about TJ and even though what TJ said recently was deplorable, that still bugged me so I thought I’d mention it.
Again this does not excuse TJ’s behavior but I don’t think that should slide either.
That right here makes you a rape apologist. Its the mindset of “its not that bad, get over it”. Its patriarchal bullshit that reinforces rape culture by shutting it away and down playing it.
Rape jokes and threats are not funny. Its a this is a real fucking fear and you don’t get to dictate if people feel threatened by threats. Rape threats have been used as a tactic to shut up women and rape victims. It is rape culture. You are protecting it and perpetuating it.
You claim you don’t like what he said? Why don’t you fucking act like it. Your lame ass “its not that bad” is the same damn tactic used by people who like it, thinks its funny or don’t mind it. Have you notice that? You place yourself in their company.
Just like goddamn white privilege. You tell a black person that lynching jokes/threats aren’t serious and aren’t that bad, you get told to get your racist ass out of here. Or like the asshate that called the Jewish man a “lampshade”? You want to claim that isn’t that fucking bad you are defending racists, making you a rape apologist.
Not that bad my ass.
So what if she was a slimeball?Does that mean that whatever he’s said is ok now?
WAIT by this logic since TJ is a sexist asshat its okay to be sexist asshats back?!? And no one can criticize us or call us out for being sexist?
I don’t think so. Unless you want to be a fucking worthless sexist hypocrite.
You’re missing the broader point, which is that I desire a complete holocaust of the human species in favor of a superior machine race, the beginnings of which are quite conveniently being spearheaded by the American Department of Defense, which, to borrow the words of the Futurist Manifesto of 1909, will be above “morality, feminism and all opportunist and utilitarian cowardice”.
Or as Filippo Tommaso Marinetti once said: La guerra è bella perché inaugura la sognata metallizzazione del corpo umano. (“War is beautiful because it inaugurates the long dreamed-of metallization of the human body.”)
How about addressing the rest of my post then. I’ll agree for the sake of argument that the person he was responding to is indefensible. This doesn’t necessarily mean that his criticisms were defensible. In fact, they weren’t as he was misrepresenting her, misrepresenting feminism and using heavily gendered insults. If you want to defend that video, you have to argue a hell of a lot more than the his target being a low-hanging fruit.
jimashby, thank you for your thoughtful character assassination of people who struggle with autism-spectrum disorders by viewing them as incapable of demonstrating empathy or refraining from anti-social and offensive speech in an on-line forum.
That’s a fairly reprehensible claim and it’s not even remotely close to being supported by any evidence at all: many Aspergers and autism sufferers if anything over-compensate to avoid giving offence.
Unless you have any solid peer-reviewed evidence to back up your squalid allegations, you should collect your decomposing porcupine at the door and find somewhere else to post while you anally insert it. Good-day.
“That right here makes you a rape apologist. Its the mindset of “its not that bad, get over it”.”
No, that’s what you call a straw man. I said it was bad and indefensible numerous times, I disagreed with people on how bad it was (and I fucking changed my mind on that). There is not only one degree of evil. And I never told anyone to get over it.
“is the same damn tactic used by people who like it, thinks its funny or don’t mind it. Have you notice that? You place yourself in their company. ”
And unlike them I’ve also stated numerous times that it’s still a shitty thing to do and not OK. Have you noticed that?
@Caine, Fleur du Mal
Listen to you. You claim to have Aspergers, yet want to deny what it is. Also, I do agree it doesn’t HAVE to mean a sufferer can’t control himself — but it’s a definite possibility .
Actually, Asperger Syndrome is just a name for a high-functioning form of autism (HFA). The main thing is that, whether or not you like to hear it — or feel that it’s insulting, SOME of those who suffer from HFA, CAN’T CONTROL THEMSELVES. It’s a fact. This does not impugn ANYBODY (not even the sufferer). It’s just a point I raised as a POTENTIAL explanation for The Amazing Atheists tirade.
It bears relevance in as much as IF he suffers from some form of HFA, this whole discussion is off base.
Oh, is that all? How boring. If you were sincere about this, you’d have already offed yourself, don’t you think? From your perspective, it’d be exactly the same thing as the annihilation of the human race.
Nihilists. *yawn*
Well, let’s just say that the industry I work in makes my life meaningful.
;)
Ok fine I agree that the video had those problems but the whole thing I responded to was a straw man that “TJ thinks the definition is vague because it has unconsciousness”. There are parts of the video I can defend but I don’t think we’d be in much disagreement over them.
TJ on rape survivors:
Source.
He’s a festering, pus-filled asspimple who can’t see one iota past his own privilege. He not only doesn’t know a single thing about what it’s like to be raped, he doesn’t care to know. All he cares about is being able to continue being an odoriferous asspimple who can threaten people with rape whenever someone upsets his little world.
Excuse me. I very obviously do have values. Just not yours.
From WebMD: Aspergers’ main symptoms:
Stop making bullshit excuses. The man is a horrible person, full stop. Perhaps he’s been traumatized, perhaps he’s mentally ill. None of those excuse him. On account of the millions of other traumatized/mentally ill people who do not do and say such horrible things to other people. The only real excuse would be that he really is a clinical psychopath and is literally incapable of empathy (rather than appearing to lack it).
jimashby, stop trying to defend the actions of moral vacuums like TJ and his die-hard supporters by tarring Autism Spectrum sufferers by association. Prove your claim or shut up.
Otherwise, one might have to conclude that your smear tactics mark you out as being of a similarly odious moral character as the rape apologists already busy in this thread.
You know what I desire, Cupcake? I desire not to be bored to tears by you. You’re an uninteresting bore. You aren’t amazing, you aren’t shocking, and you aren’t a unique little snowflake. Run off and try to give yourself cybernetic implants and leave the adults alone.
@Philip Legge,
Stating a fact is not character assassination. Those who suffer high-functioning autism (such as Asperger) have a neurological disorder that can manifest itself in a variety of anti-social ways. BECAUSE it’s a neurological disorder, nobody’s character is assassinated . . . it’s merely an unfortunate condition for those who suffer it.
Look it up yourself — that’s what Google is for. Having an HFA is doesn’t make you bad or good or any other judgmental label. It’s simply an unfortunate thing. The same as any other disease or disorder.
“You’re missing the broader point, which is that I desire a complete holocaust of the human species”
You say stuff like that and you sound like someone trying too hard to be hardcore. Nobody’s taking you seriously I can tell you that much.
You can put up a façade of sarcasm but don’t think I buy it and in any case none of it will change the inescapable fact that none of you have any real political influence whatever.
Here’s to you: CMU’s “Crusher”
All the best. :)
Nihilism refers to more than simply claiming a total lack of values. In your case, your desire for anNIHILation makes the connection to other meanings of the word obvious.
Somewhere, Pinky is wondering where his good pal The Brain is. Take pity on poor Pinky and go play with him, okay?
@SallyStrange,
What an odd reply! You don’t think that being incapable of empathy is an excuse?!? You’d rather judge somebody with such a neurological disorder than excuse him?
Where is YOUR empathy? It would be terrible to be compulsively anti-social. Empathy is a big part of our humanity . . . of the human condition. Having an HFA means you’re likely to see social situations differently than others and behave inappropriately. This is not something you beat somebody up over.
Stop poisoning the well, jimashby.
You don’t have to take me seriously, I guess. You will eventually have to take your irrelevance in American politics seriously though.
It certainly is, when your “fact” is not a fact. As is the case with your assertion about Asperger’s being related to a lack of control. Were you trying to say that TAA has Tourette’s? That doesn’t fit either. You’re making up bullshit. For some reason you are invested in denying that TAA is a virulent misogynist.
Ah, an idiot as well as a psychopath – what an admirable combination. Listen, you dim bulb, how the fuck do you think you know what the values of a “superior race”, mechanical or not, would be?
Compare to this:
You are dumb.
So you’re a lexicographer now? Last I checked you were a whinging Occupyfag barely scraping by on unemployment.
Eat shit and die, along with all the rest of the 99%.
All the best. :)
This is some high-quality trolling. You might have a point if his neurological disorder weren’t baseless speculation. Maybe SallyStrange has a neurological disorder that makes it so she can’t help judging people and you’re being unfair to her.
You can call me an idiot, I guess. I won’t contest the psychopath part. But as long as you’re calling people idiots, just remember who wields all the technological power in America.
;)
Ever hear of Hugo de Garis?
jimashby:
You aren’t stating a fact. You’re simply pulling shit out of your ass and in the process, indulging in character assassination on a wide scale.
The fact that you refuse to listen or learn in your dogged persistence of excusing TAA says a great deal about you. You’d much rather be utterly wrong about people on the spectrum than admit that TAA is yet another misogynistic asshole.
Hee.
There’s this thing, it’s called “google,” perhaps you’ve heard of it? Also, etymonline and dictionary.com.
Indeed. Although ‘fag’ isn’t accurate. Was this supposed to make me feel bad or something? Or are you just that insecure about your life choices and your sexuality?
So, the 1% are immortal now? Did they tell you this themselves or are you just inferring?
@Philip Legge
LoL!! Stop poisoning the well?!? You mean the one-sided bashing of somebody who appears to be the world’s biggest asshole?
It’s called freedom of expression. It occurred to me that this guy’s behavior is well aligned with an HFA like Asperger’s. All I’ve done is suggest another possibility. If this guy’s simply an asshole, then, of course, I say bash the crap out of him.
But what if he’s not? That’s all I’ve said or intended. If you don’t like that, just ignore me and keep bashing him.
Yes I have. But Google doesn’t authorize you to define words arbitrarily.
No. Is backtalk from a little bottom-feeding, workshy peasant like you supposed to make me feel bad?
Do I look like Congress to you, fuckwit?
@708
meant to say “thing I responded to in the first place”.
That’s the nicest thing anyone’s said to me all week. I will warn you, though: flattery will get you nowhere.
“So, the 1% are immortal now?”
Actually yes, they buy off the Grimm Reaper. Guy’s gotta pay for his scythe polish and smoke effects.
Jim Ashby, if you believe TJ Kincaid has Aspergers Syndrome, and are prepared to excuse him if he does, then PROVE THAT HE DOES. Otherwise, your well poisoning here is extremely disingenuous.
If you are unable to prove TJ is suffering from an Autism Spectrum disorder, then maybe you might also have to admit that as a mature adult, TJ has some glaring personality deficiencies which he needs to take personal responsibility for – he can no longer blame the evil gynocratic straw-feminists that exist only in his imagination for everything that he perceives to be wrong about his world.
Are you a subscriber to TJ’s YouTube channel? Of course, that might mean that YOU have happily subscribed to the same misogynistic discourse that TJ has been spouting on the Internet all these years, and wish to disassociate yourself from that. It would then be quite telling as to why you have suddenly turned up on Pharyngula to make a fatuous attempt at diagnosing a neurological condition over the Internet.
“It’s called freedom of expression.”
Who here was saying he had no legal right to say that? Anyone?
Nihilism, according to dictionary.com:
1. total rejection of established laws and institutions.
2. anarchy, terrorism, or other revolutionary activity.
3. total and absolute destructiveness, especially toward the world at large and including oneself: the power-mad nihilism that marked Hitler’s last years.
From etymonline:
1817, “the doctrine of negation” (in ref. to religion or morals), from Ger. Nihilismus, from L. nihil “nothing at all” (see nil), coined by German philosopher Friedrich Heinrich Jacobi (1743-1819).
It seems to fit. But of course, if you have labels you prefer, I’d be happy to use those instead. Cuz that’s how humanists roll. ;)
Hey, SallyStrange! This might be pertinent for you:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/12/22/unemployment-benefits_n_1165459.html
“Democrats Defend Cutting Unemployment Benefits”
Don’t bother voting this year. Circle-jerking on Pharyngula will deliver all the sweeping reforms you could possibly want. Glad to have saved you the time of waiting in the queue and all. It was nothing. No. No, really. Don’t thank me. It’s fine.
Best,
chernobog
Chernobog thinks it will hurt my feelings to repeat that I don’t have a job right now. Is this really something psychopaths do? I think he’s just a garden-variety asshole. Real psychopaths don’t waste their time attempting to taunt bottom-feeding, workshy peasants. Or, if they do, they’re probably better at it.
Jesus H. Christ you guys!
@Philip Legge,
I repeat . . . I have NEVER said that the guy has Aspergers or some other HFA. I only suggested — based on his tirade and history — that he MIGHT. And that IF he does, this brouhaha could well be about somebody who can’t even recognize his own asininity because of his lack (or absence) of empathy and social nuance.
Get over it.
Chernobog would have been right at home in 1909 along with F.T. Marinetti. If he’d been alive then could have grown up to be a real fascist pig, instead of the pathetic little wind-up troll that he is here in 2012. Yawn.
“Nihilism, according to dictionary.com…”
Ugh, dictionary.com is base and vulgar. Myself, I have a subscription to the OED and that’s the only one I’m willing to accept. Definition 1 sort of meets your criteria, but only with some qualifications … “…negativity, destructiveness, hostility to accepted beliefs or established institutions”. But I love the Department of Defense! Isn’t that an “established institution” of sorts?
In any case, being the poorfag that you are, you probably won’t be seeing much else of the OED for now. Your free trial is over. Go get a job.
And have a good one, pissant! ;)
There’s the niggling little fact that you’re completely wrong about how Asperger’s and autism work. Which means that your “MIGHT” is a pile of bullshit, and suggests that you are not being rational in suggesting possible excuses for TAA’s egregious behavior.
@friedandburnt,
Legal right? I remember plenty of outrageous, callous, hateful, words . . . but I don’t recall any direct threat, encitement to riot or other criminal speech. Wait, would his tirade fall under “Hate Speech” laws? I’m not sure.
Anybody know?
There used to be some feral cats in the neighborhood. They fought frequently at night. It was rather irritating. If they were still alive today, they might beg to differ about the “garden-variety asshole” bit.
I’m the next best thing! I serve the AmeriKKKan gubmint.
@SallyStrange
I get the impression he has an e-crush on you. He’s certainly hanging off your every word.
He’s from 4chan, hence the ‘fag’ at the end of random words. So he’s probably 13 – 17 years old, and still lives at home.
Flattering, isn’t it!
Yeah, I agree, especially since I haven’t mentioned my employment status in a little while. It is kind of flattering, but like I said before: I’m not susceptible.
Also, the bit about the cats was cute. Looks like someone used his OED subscription to look up psychopathy! What a scamp.
Nah, honestly, I hope the poorfag in question drowns in rape semen. And then, after that, has a really bad time.
Fine, you’re a troll, Jim Ashby, and you’ve said your vacuous, contemptible point that you felt was so vitally important and so mind-shatteringly novel and original, that you had to tell us. However, we’ve heard this one before numerous times, and you know what we think about it? We think it’s bullshit, Jim, utter bullshit. You haven’t got any evidence to stand on, or you’d prove it.
Now comes the hard part. If you’ve got nothing more to say – and by now it is more than evident that your one hit wonder didn’t even make a dent, then bugger off, and do try to stick the flounce. Failure to stay away after the flounce will inevitably result in harsh marks from the judges.
Well, aside from the direct threats to rape someone which were quoted in the OP.
You really are dumb, jimashby.
Collecting intelligence on people is what I do for a living. Don’t get your hopes up.
@sallystrange
You’d thing the 1% would not need to deal with feral cats. Surely they would have people to handle these things?
Oh honey. You’re not e-stalking me specifically? Now you’ve really hurt my feelings.
@chernoboy
Oh, did you catch the Hackers re-run too!? Those damn FEDs!
Well, a bona fide psycho would probably enjoy it too much to fob it off onto an underling.
However, genuine 1%ers don’t spend much time deriding other people for being low-class. Only people who are insecure about their social status do that.
@Philipe Legge,
A troll? I must admit, I didn’t exactly jump on the bandwagon. I guess that was a major gaff on my part. I mean we all know the whole point is to agree with the majority, right?
You’re right. Expressing my independent thoughts was selfish of me. I should have agreed with you guys. Especially you, since you’re obviously the coolest of the bunch.
Barf!
That idea, that Asperger’s rather than misogyny may be responsible for the bad behavior of various sexist men in the atheist movement, came up over and over again during the Elevatorgate thing.
Jimashby: never content to let people wonder if he’s dumb. No, he kindly makes sure it’s undeniable.
Also apparently afraid of engaging with me. Or something. I’m over here jim! Phillipe isn’t the only one talking to you.
Hey! Agreeing with the majority is a good thing, if are pointing out that the following quote is a really stupid, awful, horrible thing to say to someone.
TJ Kincaid:
But hey! If you want to be in the minority who think that’s just a sweet, peachy thing to say, then be my guest. I won’t stand in your way if you want to be on the side of the rape apologists.
As for freedom of expression. Dude. Do you understand what the principle of free speech means? It has nothing to do with making mind-numbingly asinine comments on Pharyngula, as you’ve been doing since you got here.
@SallyStrange
Ooops, post fail, that was weird. Now I’m worried he’s hacking my TCP/IP stack, backtracing me, and tcpdumping my dox. And that would totally harsh my buzz.
Anyway, if I he was the 1%, he wouldn’t be hanging out here. He’d be sipping champagne while flying over the 99%, laughing maniacally.
Sally,
I gather from his last comment, which ended with “Barf!” that he’s being a bad house-guest and is vomiting up on the rug. I do hope PZ will be able to clean up the mess when he gets up, but it is rather bad manners of Jim to regurgitate stale arguments all over the place.
Look Jimashby. You made a claim other people looked at that claim and said that’s bullshit. A normal adult would have said either no it’s not bullshit and here’s why or you’re right that was bullshit my mistake.
Instead your response was “Come on you guys I’m totally right let me just restate what I said before thus negating your rebuttals” and now “Waaah you’re infringing on my free speech by speaking, waaah.” Which suggests to me that you’re a MRA or something. I know they don’t have a monopoly on whining, but among their community it’s pretty damn ubiquitous.
In Elevatorgate, it was plausible that a socially-awkward person might not not know any better than hitting on a strange woman in an enclosed space. (Though Rebecca later clarified the guy didn’t seem socially awkward, so this is unlikely.) Here, it’s not an issue of misunderstanding some complicated courtship ritual. Not threatening to rape people is pretty straightforward as far as social expectations go. No one doesn’t know better than this. Someone is just trying to reuse arguments regardless of fit.
I’ve always been a fan of women, and not just because they’re bumpy and curvy and stuff (though there is that). I fully admit that, in my youth especially, my fondness was biased by a sometimes unrealistic biological imperative. I was, and still am, a shameless flirt.
Most women take it in the spirit in which it is intended. It is possible to flirt while being respectful and courteous, though it takes a certain amount of finesse to pull it off. I’ve usually been pretty good at telling when a woman isn’t into that sort of thing, and conduct myself accordingly.
There have been times that I was wrong. Spectacularly wrong.
In those cases, I’m appropriately contrite, and am usually forgiven. I have this habit of calling women “dear”. Recently, a lady took exception to it, and asked me why I used the term. I thought about explaining my feelings about women in general, but she kinda caught me off guard, so I said, “Because calling you antelope wouldn’t make any sense.” I know, I know. At that point, I should have just curled up into a fetal position, and called it a day. But luckily, she actually thought it was funny.
Another incident. A young lady I work with came up to me and said, “I wanna be you when I grow up.” To keep from getting weepy at the sentiment, I said, “You know, if I were 30 years younger, I’d be chasing you around the parking lot.”
She gave me this beautiful smile, and said, “If I were 30 years older, you just might catch me.”
Yep, I still got it.
Private jets don’t have wi-fi? What a travesty.
Like my new pseudonym?
Well if you’ve got it, Sally, you may as well flaunt it!
I wear waistcoats now. Waistcoats are cool.
I know you’re here, SallyStrange, I just don’t care. I can see you’re intent on putting words in my mouth, so I’ll let you do all the talking. In fact, why not just get yourself a hand puppet and quit wasting pixels?
Sally Strange,
Can you do me a favor and put the missing hyphen in “work-shy” where it belongs? I know, you’re quoting that bizarre little Chernobot’s insult – and preserving its mistakes for posterity … just sets my teeth on edge, that’s all.
Hey, I think we might have an old fogey PUA in our midst with the almost aptly named
AustinMichael Powers.This thread is getting to be a real pain to read, now that it’s nearly at 800 posts.
Ace of Seven
I’d say that their huge viewer-base is indeed attention. But this is a blog. Most people here prefer blogs to youtube and there is a reason for that. We don’t owe them our attention, they don’t have to mention all the cool blogs on their videos.
Also, you clearly aren’t observing enough. Linking approvingly to Pat Condell will get you nastily critical comments in no time. People responded highly critical when Zomgitschris’ visit to Tam was announced.
So, I’d say you’re talking out of your ass here.
What on earth do you think we’ve been doing those last 8 months or so? You know, people have discussed the negative sides of Dawkins, Hitchens, Harris, Penn Jillette, DJ Grothe etc ad nauseum those last months.
To say that we don’t care is simply dishonest.
What am I supposed to do? Watch AronRa all day long (I admit he could read the phonebook to me)
You know, Twilight also sells better than the God Delusion. I would say the best method is to make the quality stuff better known, don’t you think? Like promoting all those truely amazing blogs over here that have seem a huge increase in readership after coming to FTB
firedandburned
Naaa, you’re just making a fat bit “Yes, but…” argument, drawing the attention from the nauseatingly bad things TJ said to the smaller crime of IcumwhenIkillmen. That’s called victim blaming. You know, I’m not saying that it was OK to break her jaw and her nose and her arm, but she said he was ann asshole, can we please stop talking about the broken bones and focus on the asshole?
Can people finally agree on the gender of the poster? Up it was claimed that he was a male rape-victim, now she’s a woman. Maybe that person just doesn’t matter as much to the argument than you think.
And what did he do? Did he ask for clarification?
Did he say, “Well, it seem like you missed that some people like to be tied to the bed and fucked with a dildo in the ass”?
No, what he did was to call the whole fucking list “vague and mildly crazy” (not an actual quote), making it sound that “don’t rape unconscious women as debatable as “don’t fuck restrained people even if they’d like you to” (which wasn’t explicitly said). You know, he threw out the whole list without any qualification, thus giving support to people who say that it’s ok to have sex with their girlfriend while she’s asleep.
No, he simply said it was vague and left it for the audience to pick and chose.
Wrong. That video was brought up when
A) people claimed that other people had never watched his videos
B) this was a one-time mistake and not a fucking pattern.
As such it is relevant evidence in the discussion.
mikepaps
Nice try, comparing actual human suffering with pictures of an imaginary dead prophet.
Also, please exercise your free speech in that way towards your boss, please. Come back and report.
No, you’re just an asshole. So, people lie. Completely utterly irrelevant. Absolutely irrelevant if ICWIKM lied. Fact is that TJ thought he’d found a way to hurt that person in the crulest way possible and used it.
You know, worst case, best case scenario
Person lies: Worst case: you believe the lie. You behave like a decent person around somebody who you think has severe PTSD.
Person tells the truth: Worst case: you don’t believe them, act like a total asshole, re-traumatize them and trigger them.
Easy, isn’t it.
You know, nobody has asked you to give rape-victims a pass on every shit they say. You can still think and say that they are total scumbags for eating life mice. And you can say that. You can even say “I’ll drop the subject now, I think it hit’s too closely home for you”
Easy, isn’t it?
Good that nobody gives a shit about your opinion then.
Ya know, people have watched his videos and come to the conclusion that he is indeed a misogynist. Maybe that was the term you were looking for.
I rmember that I personally dropped him when he told that “sure, rapists are bad, but he once knew a woman who made party in sexy clothes and then got raped and so he thought that it was her fault”
That’s not a feminist statement. That’s a misogynist one.
Shorter you: I prefer to think that people are lying. It saves me the trouble of behaving like a decent person towards them.
I would like to see a medical certificate of TAA’s level of intoxication that very night, please.
Oh, wait, you just believed that, didn’t you? You probably even just assumed it and excused his behaviour.
Double standard?
Also, no, if my partner can only refrain from beating me up when he’s sober, he’s not a peacefull man.
a3kron
You’re right, rape is pretty depressing. But good to see your priorities. You know, you’re like all thise catholics who kind of agree that raping children is bad, but still there are some good catholic charities and all thise people whi insist on talking about child-rape instead are really just uppity naggers.
thecalmone
I’m sorry about what happened to you. It’s shitty and nobody said that women can’t be immoral assholes who hurt their partners as much as they can (I know a few of them myself, so does everybody else).
The problem is that those false accusations are the used by people who actually give a shit about the person who was falsely accused to frame it like all accusations of domestic violence/rape are most likely wrong and just women who want to ruin good guys’ lives.
He’s doing one massive “Yes, but the other side made me do it”. That’s not an excuse. It is one, if you’re 4 years old, only that sensible people usually don’t let you get away with it when you’re 4, so I have no reason to let an adult get away with it.
Noadi
Thanks for confirming my suspicions that his claim was utter bullshit. (Not a BDSM myself)
The moment I realize a threat is serious is in the moment of attack. A threat is meant to intimidate. If you threaten somebody with violence unless they give you their wallet, and they give it to you, you don’t get away with saying “but I’d never have used violence”. Same when you threaten somebody with rape unless they shut up.
You mean the context of somebody angrily trying to shut somebody up by whatever means necessary?
Also, again, what context except an explicit BDSM-setting makes “I’ll make you a rape victim” OK?
That’s shitty and should stop. Not because it hands TJ Kincaid the victim card but because it’s bad. To anybody. No excuse for that.
Just_A_Lurker
Please, don’t
We’ve had the “die in a fire upthread”.
It is a phrase that is also hurtfull for people who have fire-related PSTD or who have lost loved ones in fires.
And I’m sorry for what happened. I wished that only people were allowed to judge on rape and abuse cases who have a special education in that field.
jimashby
Not that shit. There are many people here on the spectrum who will tell you absolutely that this is not true. Also, if you can’t trust yourself from not harming people, it’s your duty to remove yourself from those situations.
Fixed it for you.
So, you have no evidence that he actually might suffer from Aspberger’s (funny that people here who do seem to be well-adjusted and capable of understanding), but you’re going to lecture us all the time how unfair we would be if he had it.
Makes you an apologist for him.
Chernobog, you do realise that the number of people who believe your boasting is currently zero?
Jim Ashby, take your own advice and let your betters do the talking. You’ve got zero to add that’s worth hearing.
Maybe if you do the sensible thing and fuck off out of here for, say, a year, we’ll forget what a useless tickweed you were and you can get a fresh start.
Yes! But he seems to have run off to check some government database or something. I was hoping for his 1% appraisal before I spoke.
Well, I did say several times that jimashby was wrong and dumb, but I don’t recall saying that HE said those things.
Anyway, new improved moniker: now with better punctuation!
CLASSIFICATION:
Asperger syndrome (AS) is one of the autism spectrum disorders (ASD) or pervasive developmental disorders (PDD), which are a spectrum of psychological conditions that are characterized by abnormalities of social interaction and communication that pervade the individual’s functioning, and by restricted and repetitive interests and behavior.
SOCIAL INTERACTION:
The lack of demonstrated empathy is possibly the most dysfunctional aspect of Asperger syndrome.[2] Individuals with AS experience difficulties in basic elements of social interaction, which may include a failure to develop friendships or to seek shared enjoyments or achievements with others (for example, showing others objects of interest), a lack of social or emotional reciprocity, and impaired nonverbal behaviors in areas such as eye contact, facial expression, posture, and gesture.
^^^^
Seriously dude?
And he fails to stick the flounce! Nul points.
What does citing some documentation about AS prove, Jim Ashby?
Prove it applies to TJ Kincade, or you’re a bullshitter trying to play Internet psychologist.
@hyperdeath
Chernoboy did say this earlier:
And I was thinking, I can actually believe that he does get free burgers at the end of a shift. I’d find that meaningful too, especially as I’m really hungry right now.
Oh you foolish foolish women and rape victims!
Don’t you know that “I’m going to rape you with my fist” is a special man’s way of showing that he is a free-thinking, possibly autistic, harmless joker? It’s just how we free-thinking geniuses on the internet say “hello” and “goodbye”. Why are you getting so uptight? Don’t you know how to speak the lingo of the youth on the web? Obviously you are oldfags, moralfags or some-otherfags. There, I have appended fag to some perceived aspect of your posts and person. You are now irrelevant.
Anyway, I am far too bust to be on the internet, so I shall sign off in the tradition manner of the harmless, woman friendly, internet joker:
I’m going to ear-rape you with a watermelon.
Louis
P.S. Just in case I haven’t telegraphed it enough, I am mocking the misogynists and rape apologists. The above contains sarcasm.
Fucking useless tickweed plagiarized a wiki entry which doesn’t even begin to support his claim.
Nothing in there about Aspies being socially dysfunctional such that they are likely to rant about drowning someone in rape semen.
Fuck off, Jim Ashby. You had your chance; you blew it.
Intent isn’t fucking magic
It doens’t require finesse. It requires a keen understanding of the concept that women are human. When you say “it requires finesse” I strongly suggest you are doing this wrong.
Paging mr Dunning and Mr Krüger. You’re urgently needed!
Ok, I get it. You’re a bastard* (no-one but an utter bastard calls persons outside hir very most itimate zone “dear” – especially not women 2*). I gather that you’re also a disarminly funny bastard. What’s important for you to realize that while this enables you to get away with being a bastard, it doesn’t make being a bastard right. It just places a far greater onus on you to change, since a bastard that gets away with it is far more dangerous to society at large.
You realize she was most likely taking the piss out of you- right? Most likely since you’re in a position of power and she looks up to you, but the gross sexual harrasment and sexism in your comment was a bit too much to bear.
Pretty please with sugar on top – could you please stop being a bastard?
__
*I gather being born out of wedlock is common enough and accepted enough this day and age for “bastard” to be a good and acceptable general insult for a nasty person. No offence to persons of uncertain patronage intended.
2* Though it can be fun and effective to be a bastard towards stodgy old men
I gather the fruit of choice for that is the banana, Louis.
Philip Legge,
Given the source of your recommendation, I’m sticking with watermelons. Even for us free-thinking, possibly autistic, totally woman friendly and harmless rape joke making geniuses* on the internet that guy is a step too far.
Louis
*Again. Joke.
Any thread even tangentially related to feminism really does bring out the misogynist kooks in droves doesn’t it? It leads me to wonder; do they have some kind of bigot-signal they send up to summon more of their fellows to a thread so they can all be clueless together, or are we seeing another outbreak of sock puppeting?
What people often miss in online discussions is that the commenter who can’t take a clue and is constantly demonstrating how stupid he is might well suffer from a mental disorder, like Asinine Stupidity Syndrome.
These people can’t help themselves. They’re hard-wired to be brainless. Some actually think they are contributing original thoughts and ideas to the discussion that haven’t been considered before. But in actuality, they simply don’t realize that they are acephalic non-entities, mouthing empty platitudes.
There’s allways the sad, third option: They are inn the woodwork all along, and the foul stench of mysogyny only draws them out so we notice.
FIFY, NNTTM, YA.
Thanks Josh, thanks. (Aspie speaking)
Yes, I didn’t appreciate this lazy man’s excuse for moral turpitude either.
Louis, I hope you drown in ear-rape fruit-pulp. Dear.
Chernobog reminds me of that moron chris-whatever, who took to spamming the blog with endless German verse. I’m not saying it’s the same fuckwit, though I wouldn’t rule it out, but it has the same thinly-disguised insecurity and self-loathing, betrayed by “shocking” nihilism and ridiculous boasts.
So cool how it crushes those 200-year-old yuccas out there at Fort Irwin.
Is this a new game? Can anyone play?
In my opinion, Santorum is a gay rights activist, but would never call himself one because he doesn’t like the term.
In my opinion, the Pope is an atheist, but would never call himself one because he doesn’t like the term.
In my opinion, Stalin was a libertarian, but would never have called himself one because he didn’t like the term.
In my opinion, Einstein was an accountant, but would never have called himself one because he didn’t like the term.
ChasCPeterson,
Why thank you. That was a totally non threatening and funny thing for you to say. Tell me, are you too an internet free thinker genius, possibly autistic, who means no harm by things other people might think of as rape threats?
Louis
P.S. You do get I am mocking TAA and his apologists right?
Why, possibly.
I’m on the internet, that’s for sure!
Chas,
I think we should form a special club for special people. Only truly free-thinking, possibly autistic, non threatening rape joke making/apologising people allowed. Hmmmmm let me think of an acronym…
Louis
jimashby, NO. This has nothing to do with autism, and the fact that you keep claiming it does is more and more proof that you have no idea what you’re talking about. There are people commenting here, trying to explain it to you, who have autism, who have friends and family who have autism, and who have studied autism a lot. Absolutely nothing about this guy’s behavior is consistent with anything on the autism spectrum. It is only consistent with being a misogynistic asshole.
Way back upthread to Caine – I think what Azkyroth was doing was saying that erections aren’t always under conscious control, therefore a guy could get one in the process of being raped without enjoying it at all.
It’s like “aloha” for douchebags!
I wish people would just ignore him, he gets more attention and hits when people start making threads to vent about his bs ridden mouth. I mean seriously, if people hate him so much; say nothing find his pages and continuously report them. He’ll eventually be banned from posting to major outlets, because I doubt he can successfully hack his way around website blocks. And if he does, those websites are within their rights to have him quietly arrested and prosecuted for such things. Because there is no solid law for freedom of speech online (yet). Or best case scenario, he has no audience and he fades into obscurity because no one will read about his nonsense or watch him anymore.
Does this transelate into: “No, don’t talk about sexists. You’re ruining the safe spaces for us, the enablers and quite, subtle sexists by calling attention to the overt bigots”?
Trying to use the banana incident to discredit TJ is just another form of slut-shaming. It isn’t helping.
You asshole. She didn’t say she wanted to fuck you. She said she wanted to be you. A decent person in this situation would say they’re flattered, and if the young person showed promise maybe offer advice or mentorship, which is what you’d likely have done had this been a young man. You, in contrast, chose to remind her of just how difficult it will be for her to get to your place since as a woman she’s seen as a sexual object. Asshole.
What really frightens me is that this is the story he tells us to show that he supports wimmen with their curves and all (well, their curves at least).
I don’t dare to think of the stories he isn’t telling us.
@Giliel: After reading around a bit more, it seems the problem is that noen of the bloggers here follow YouTube atheism, so he went unnoticed despite being wildy popular. Do a search or on ScienceBlogs though and you’ll see many approving links and very little criticism in the eternal thread. It does seem pretty clear to me many readers didn’t care about his misogyny. Yes, there’s been a lot of attention on sexism in the atheist community, but all your examples said sexist things about atheists or denied there was sexism at conferences or something. This was shit that directly impacted atheist women. Until he went after Rebecca Watson, TJ aimed most of his misogyny at creationists that he was “pwning” and this apparently kept him off the radar, despite his audience fo hundreds of thousands, including a bunch of people who post here.
So, let’s see if I got this right.
TAA possibly might have Aspergers, so we should excuse him.
Something about that just doesn’t sit right. Something just doesn’t quite add up.
Is it the fact that he might have Aspergers, but that’s just pure speculation pulled out of the deep recesses of someone’s ass? No, that’s not it.
Is it that most people with Aspergers somehow manage to avoid extended, narcissistic, hate-filled rants? I don’t think that’s it, either.
Oh! I know! It’s that even a person with Aspergers who goes on extended angry rants with threats of rape and the vile, malicious, cruel taunting of rape victims would be a complete fucking asshole. Yeah, Aspergers might make the ranting harder to control — I don’t know, as I don’t have Aspergers. But the content of the rant is what makes it vile. The thoughts and purpose behind the rant make it contemptible. It’s the actual person we see that’s ugly and despicable.
Yeah. That’s what was bugging me about this.
What’s with all these people and their half-assed defenses of this asshole? “Yes, his rant was terrible, but…”
Let me spell it out for you, Cupcakes. Any time you start a strong condemnation of an action, and then follow it with a “but…,” you are effectively negating your condemnation. You are essentially saying, “While I claim to condemn his words, I really do not.” You are making excuses, apologizing, but not in the “I’m sorry” way.
You are defending.
And that’s especially weak when your “but…” is nothing more than the stupidest, most crass possible speculation.
nigel, you have been particularly awesome in this thread, just sayin’.
how rational of you to threaten violence. You must make Papa TJ so proud.
Seriously, the fight isn’t against theist/atheist. This is an eye opener. It’s between decent people and blinded by ideology assholes.
Looks like a counter ticked over, and the first 800 or so comments got… what? Archived somewhere? Can’t read ’em here (I think I got through 500 of them yesterday). Can someone point me to where they might be hiding?
Looks like a counter ticked over, and the first 800 or so comments got… what? Archived somewhere? Can’t read ‘em here (I think I got through 500 of them yesterday). Can someone point me to where they might be hiding?
Look for an “older comments” link – for me it’s above “Leave a reply” but I seem to remember that it wanders a bit.
Sadly you are correct.
@carlie:
Thanks. I’m not easily offended, I think, but rape is one of those things that riles me up. I’ve known too many people who have been raped and sexually abused, including one of my sisters (who was later beat up by a boyfriend and left for dead). Reading shit like TAA saying people don’t die from rape drives me to the edge of wishing violence upon them.
Got it! Thank you, Gnumann. When I went to the “Equality” sub-category of the site, that link was obvious. In the full “Pharyngula” parent version of this thread, that link was hard for me to find (probable stupidity on my part, or my brain rightly wanting to save itself from reading lots of drivel. Well, brain, you’re just going to have to deal with it! Muahahaha!).
Even now with people descending into exactly the sort of attempting trigger TJ does and gorn fantasy/threats of violence I have to smile. Such a clear indication that they have nothing. They can’t defend it, can’t demonstrate basic empathy, so their only ‘out’ is throwing a tantrum and trying to bully.
Yes. Yes, it does.
Also, “Stop talking about it, because it makes me feel uncomfortable in the back of my mind because I realize that I act and think like that sometimes too, and I don’t want to have to think that I’m doing something bad or risk having people yell at me for it.”
Gnumann @ 786;
You are right, and it is a disturbing thought. If this type of rape apologia and misogyny filled comments aren’t to any significant degree the product of bussed in bigots or sock puppets then it just goes to show how very badly afflicted by misogyny the sceptical community (for want of a better term) really is.
Leaving aside the easy ammunition it provides to theists who want to delegitimise atheism and scepticism wholesale, and have no problem hypocritically wrapping themselves in the figurative flag of the fight against sexism to do it, I find it deeply depressing that so many of my fellow self identified rationalists seem incapable of turning their reason toward the power dynamics within relationships between people and understanding the toxic prevalence of rape culture in our society.
I fail to see what it so complex or objectionable about the proposition ‘women are people too, and should be treated as such’ that so many of these clowns feel the need to rant so long and loudly against it.
SC: To be fair, Wilfred Brimley only sexually objectified his admirer to avoid shedding tears. If you can’t demean women to save the appearance of toxic masculinity, then we may as well all start picking posies on Pansy Lane.
He’s a terror at funerals, by the way.
*Your grandpa was a good man, and a good friend of mine. [Insert fumbling pass for the purpose of tear-avoidance here]*
The crux of it is that they reject that that is what feminism means. It’s to them like saying “Christianity is love, why are you so against that!?”
Me, above:
since as a woman she’s seen as a sexual object
That wasn’t exactly correct. It seems pretty clear to me that for these PUA types it’s not really fundamentally about sex, but about narcissism. Women, to them, aren’t so much sexual objects as means of assuaging their deep-rooted insecurities and gratifying their fragile egos. That’s what all of their interactions with women, including sex, are about. Narcissism. It’s quite sad.
Uhm, you might actually want to investigate this a little more. There are plenty of instances in which on-line altercations turned serious.
Yes, it was so much fun having to move to a whole other city (which I couldn’t really afford) with an unlisted number (which I couldn’t really afford) because a creep on the internet decided I was his “one true love” and tracked down where I lived, where I worked, and even where my son went to school.
What an odd reply! You don’t think that being incapable of empathy is an excuse?!? You’d rather judge somebody with such a neurological disorder than excuse him?
You fucking moron, “appear to lack empathy” doesn’t mean they lack it!
What part of this are you too fucking stupid to get?
Yes. Oddly I just can’t seem to care. Must be neurological.
Also, “lacking empathy” doesn’t mean “being an asshole who taunts rape victims with further rape”. All “lacking empathy” means, in the case of autism spectrum, is a) being unable to read body language to understand what a person is feeling and/or b) not understanding what a person might be feeling in a particular situation. People with autism are perfectly capable of understanding that, say, a person will feel sad at the death of a loved one, just not notice that a particular person is feeling sad at that particular moment and that the sadness is related to that death.
There is absolutely NOTHING about “lacking empathy” that leads to rape threats like “I am going to rape you with my fist” and taunts like “I want to give your rapist a medal” and “I bet thinking about your rape is making you wet now” (or whatever that last one was).
The idea of taunting a rape victim actually indicates empathy, just not compassion.
He understood what the other person would or might feel…and wanted to cause that.
Someone who likes hurting animals and goes out of his way to torture them does not have a failure to understand what pain is.
The lack of demonstrated empathy
Lack of DEMONSTRATED empathy DOES NOT EQUAL lack of ANY empathy, you fucking illiterate douchebag!
What part of this are you too fucking stupid to get?
Sally, #657:
The same was said about “The Monument” over on ERV, but a lot of
assholes“skeptics” remained unconvinced.Jim Ashby: For fuck’s bloody sake, shut the fuck up about things you have no fucking clue about. “Asshole” isn’t on the spectrum. Having difficulty expressing empathy, especially in the right manner, does not mean being incapable of empathy. ASD != sociopathy or psychopathy. Lots of people with ASDs are perfectly good people with some difficulty interacting socially. Lots of neurotypical people are scum. And, finally, regardless of a person’s diagnosis, if they cannot keep themselves from harming others, society acts or should act to protect others from them, not provide endless excuses.
Throwing an unlikely possibility out as a defense is JAQing off. Digging your heels in when called on it with the rationalization of “FREE SPEECH!!!” is just fucking stupid.
Also, learn to read. Caine does not claim to have Asperger’s.
Chernobog, if you were actually collecting intelligence on people, you wouldn’t be here boasting about it. At best, you’re yet another oligarchy-felching cubicle monkey who thinks his proficiency with ones and zeroes makes him an Übermensch and whose copy of Atlas Shrugged has many pages stuck together.
If all the wishes of the actual 1% come true someday, you’ve got one hell of an unpleasant surprise coming to you.
Shorter Michael Powers: “I like to come into discussions about feminism and misogyny and tell everybody what my penis likes, how much teh ladeez like it when I ‘flirt’ with them, and how it’s OK to patronize them or sexually harass them because I’m one of those older dudes who thinks it’s acceptable that my concept of equality stopped evolving in about 1971.”
Take your smug, privilege-poisoned, not-as-funny-as-you-think ass out of here, preferably while it’s cradling a dead porcupine.
Gregory Greenwood, I suspect the Crazed Misogynist Signal was manufactured by the same company that made the Paulorrhoid Bat[shit] Signal.
@399. mikepaps :
.. Or get a restraining order.
.. Or alert the moderator /webmaster.
.. Or call security /the bouncers / police as applies.
Thinking your right to spew whatever hateful shit you have to say without thinking that you may be hurting some people, makes you an inconsiderate selfish asshole.
Yes, free speech is a constititional right within certain set limits – yelling “FIRE!” in a crowded cinema, slandering / libelling folks, inciting a riot, publishing classified information, etc ..
But just because you have a right to do something doesn’t mean you shouldn’t think about others and aren’t an ass for excerising it right irresponsibly and harmfully making other peoples days worse.
There’s a label for people who lack empathy and/or compassion to the point they intentionally cause harm to other people. It ain’t Aspergers.
It’s “sociopath.”
Ms. Daisy Cutter:
*choke*
What’s that called when coffee comes spurting out of your nose?
Granted, I wasn’t around in 1971 – but should’t somebody have blugdegoned a clue into him even back then?
@ nigelTheBold, Abbot of the Hoppist Monks;
I would just like to second carlie’s comment on this – you are right on the money here, nigelTheBold. Not only is invoking Aspergers a spectacularly poor excuse for the vile rape threats and deliberate attempts at triggering by TAA – Aspergers is a social dysfunction condition, but it doesn’t magically transform its sufferers into hatred spewing misogynist gits; that is still the fault of the person themsleves – but seeking to relate tha actions of people like TAA to Aspergers throws people on the autism spectrum under the bus wholesale by implying that their condition makes them into that type of empathy-free monster by default.
I applaud your stand on this. It needs to be said and said again until it finally sinks in. People on the autism spectrum aren’t monsters from outerspace, and using the existence of the condition to attempt to excuse outright bigotry is deeply offensive and discriminatory in its own right.
Hmm .. The comment count seems to have gone backwards – and that’s not all that has in this world.
What a depressing thread this is with such sorry excuses for Humans posting upon it.
Salvaged at least partially by some excellent, clear-thinking great intelligent and compassionate responses to those Male Rape Apologists by other far better humans.
Yes, I’ve actually read through thelot, my brain hurts, my “soul” (for want of better word – hey its well past middnight my time zone & semi-drunk as usual) aches & Ineed to sleep.
Some of the defence of the indefensible rape culture spewing here is just beyond the limits of expressible repugnance and revulsion.
MRA’s – not enough dead prcupines, hedgehogs and echidnas on the planet for them all.
An Ahbrew?
*smacks head*
Of course. That’s exactly what it is. Perfectly stated.
@27.nigelTheBold, Abbot of the Hoppist Monks :
What’s that called when coffee comes spurting out of your nose?
Dunno. A nose vomit maybe?
Christers, MRAsexistscum, conservatards, homophones–
They all seem to use the same kind of idiotic and dishonest “arguments”.
homophobes, that is.
What a typo, eh?
Yes, I like that. Very much.
I miss the day when the nerds were the people you rooted for against the bullies.
Now that the ubiquity of computers has given them a taste of power, they’ve shown us they’re just as assholey as the jocks or more so, since I doubt a jock bully would be such a spineless coward as to blame a disease for his friends’ bullying attitudes.
They’re powerglovers.
Granted, I wasn’t around in 1971 – but should’t somebody have blugdegoned a clue into him even back then?
They don’t want the clue, dear. It serves them to belittle and ignore it.
annoyedwithnonsense,
I understand the desire to starve this guy of the oxygen of publicity, that’s not a bad idea. However, if he is ignored by everyone (or a significant number of people) he spouts his guff unchallenged and that’s really not good. Note that you don’t want him ignored, you want him (to some degree) silenced, let the authorities on message boards deal with him, even prosecuted.
No, no a thousand times no!
First, hate what he says though I do, I defend his right to say it. Utterly. I’d do the same for anyone. Second, if he is silenced in this way, what about when I want to speak and someone wants me silenced? No, that won’t do! The best way to deal with drivellers like TAA is to get in their face and ARGUE with them. If you don’t like the noise, shut the door and put your headphones on. These people need confronting about their bigotry, often and loudly. They have the right to free speech and so do we. In abundance. With bells on. So let’s use it, not delegate it to an authority we hope will act in our interest.
Louis
Oh look, another Internet Tough Guy who thinks hating feminists and threatening to rape people makes him cool and edgy! I’ve never ever seen any of those before!
@ We Are Ing;
Good point. And of course they, despite being almost exclusively the beneficiaries of male privilege, naturally feel that they have the right to define what feminism really means…
——————————————————————
@ Ms. Daisy Cutter, Gynofascist in a Spiffy Hugo Boss Uniform
It is indeed fortunate that I was not imbibing any beverage when I first read this.
I can just see the Crazed Misogynist Signal now…
Projected onto the lowering storm clouds that oppressively loom over a dystopian, near future metropolis – a cry for help, a plea for justice, a demand for retribution – one hundred-foot tall letters that spell out the legend; ‘wot about teh menz!?’
And all across that troubled city, the eyes of MRAs and rape apologists are raised unto the heavens, and the muster begins. Would-be dark avengers rise form their basement lairs; armoured in faux-righteous indignation, armed with slut-shaming and silencing tactics, they steal out into the turbulent night to defend all male-kind from the horror of the twisted castration-fantasies of the gynofascist intertoob gangs and their feared leader, Daisy ‘the Joker’ Cutter…
Since when are rape threats protected speech?
Awesome.
Chernobog is either a jet-setting, dark-suited, International Man of Mystery with a security clearance twelve steps above Top Secret who splits his time between advising DARPA on their latest superweapon, buzzing his private island fortress in his turbine-engined motorcycle/hanglider, and banging his supermodel wife and her twin sister (he could only openly marry one of them, but neither could resist his porn-star sized penis)…
…or he’s a kid on the internet who’s read a lil’ too much Michael Crichton.
There’s unfortunately no real way of telling them apart, but given their relative frequency in the wild, I’m gonna have to go with B, Alex.
. . .
Reading his stuff, I’m seriously torn between doing Chuck Norris rifs and pardoying the ‘Most Interesting Man in the World’ bit. Chernobog’s both, really.
Wasn’t Chernobog the devil from Fantasia?
Oh hell no! Fuck off to your church and don’t come back, chernobog.
Almost.
“Chernabog”, as per Wikipedia. Initial inspiration was apparently spelled the same, though.
Remember kids. It’s not cool or hip to be ‘nice’ or ‘care about things’. It’s all about attitude *swooooosh!* and being aloof! That’s the kind of people folks like!
Nigel:
It’s called “another keyboard-shaped stamp on the side of my desk,” that’s what it’s called.
Also, Brownian: I am seriously honored.
Gregory:
No matter how much they beg me, I will not show them how I make a pencil disappear.
The name “Chernobog” means “dark god” or “black god” in at least one Slavic language, I believe. I wouldn’t know anything about its pop-culture relevance without Googling.
Just in case our MRA apologist is still reading, THIS is what those groups should be fighting against if they want to end mother-centric divorce settlements, not claiming that women are all lying cheats to get their children:
Lynda Laughlin of the US Census Bureau’s Fertility and Family Statistics Branch, explaining why is it that the Census Bureau assumes mothers to be the “designated parent” in a two-parent household, and why further it considers a father providing childcare while mother is at work/school to be a “child care arrangement” but a mother providing childcare while father is at work/school to be designated parenting.
@gilell
You realize Icumwhenikillmen and the rape victim are two different people right?
And yes because he called the list vague and didn’t insult people’s intelligence by saying why he must have had a problem with the unconsciousness part, and we can assume this because …
Cross posted because it’s funny to see how myopic his fans are
AWWWWWWW POOR TJ. He tries to apologize and no one wants to listen to him. Now everyone’s being mean and won’t let him play reindeer games!
Not christian, not required to forgive because someone did a hail marry. I do not believe the sincerity. Forgiveness takes time and his track record now ain’t good.
But yeah once again it’s all about TJ! ME ME ME ME ME why won’t anyone think about how mean they’re being to me! I said I was sorry!
More forgiveness as a weapon. This is Eric Cartman bullshit.
SC,
I presume you’re referring to my #38.
Yeah, I fucked up in how I phrased that. I don’t want (rape) threats to be protected speech, at least not protected from legal consequence. I meant that “general misogynist speech”, i.e. something that could be argued with. I’m not sure I could argue with a threat…
Anyway, I was clear in what I meant, I just ballsed up getting it across.
Louis
Ace of Seven
Well, that may be perfectly true, but, they’re not the internet police. They don’t have to roam the web for examples of atheist misogyny (actually, they’re usually right delivered at your door).
So, unless you complain that they’re ignoring misogyny in the atheist community per se, I think you should allow people to pick their battles.
I admit that I haven’t been on SB much since FTB started, so, I won’t comment on that. But since SB also hosts ERV, I believe everything possible. But do you mean TET here on Pharyngula?
Possible
I don’t understand what you mean here.
Are you saying that, yes, people have been voxal and very active about sexism in the atheist community, but intentionally gave him a pass because his targets were creationist women?
Names, please. Links, please. You’re being a bit vague for my taste, often invoking “people” “readers” and such.
It’s not that I don’t think it possible, but, well, “people who post here” is not necessarily a qualifier. Crazy and mikepaps also fit that definition.
yep.
What we have here is yet another internet narcissist.
The ones that disagree with me are by far the most annoying.
No. Cover your ears or stick your head in a bag.
Take your own advice – all the cool kids are doing plastic.
friedandburnt
No, I didn’t, thank you for the clarification
Yes?
We can assume that because what?
If he had wanted to criticise some point or other he would have made that clear from the beginning.
You know that that’s a particularly dishonest tactic? Say that there are some wrong or crazy statements somewhere, not qualify which ones and then hide whenever somebody criticizes you for that.
Each time the fact that intoxicated people can’t give consent comes up you get a bunch of people getting all up in arms about the fact that they’re not allowed to fill women up with alcohol and then rape them.
You give him the benefit of doubt because there’s probably some trace of decency left in you that signals that sex with unconscious people = rape and you really want him to have that amount of decency left, too.
And others will assume that he’s on their side because yeah, bitches ain’t shit.
I have to say, I used to be quite an active follower of youtube atheism, long before I discovered pharyngula, and I’ve voiced my opinion on TJ’s misogyny and general stupidity often in comments, however more often than not that would mean an inbox full of bat shit crazy responses the next day. It’s depressing that this guy has been getting away with this shit and even more depressing that he’s pretty much the most popular youtube atheist. Can you imagine someone who’s just getting acquainted with atheism and the atheist community looking stuff up on youtube and finding this bullshit?
“You give him the benefit of doubt because there’s probably some trace of decency left in you that signals that sex with unconscious people = rape and you really want him to have that amount of decency left, too.”
Because he’s never indicated he believes that and you are making a giant stretch to pretend that he does.
Your whole fucking tactic is “he said it was vague and he didn’t say why therefore I’ll make up a reason and stick with it”.
And really you’re going to put “called a vague list vague but didn’t say why” as a misstep comparable to this?
Well, that reminded me, but it was really in response to a series of comments from last night.
***
Not all of the examples you were given. I even linked you to a thread about Sarah Palin from as far back as 2008. Did you miss my comment?
I do, yes. Though on review, I found one positive mention and one negative mention after this behavior had been established, so Pharyngula wasn’t as big a contributor to this as I remembered.
I can’t explain everyone’s behavior with one statement. For a lot of people, it probably wasn’t intentional. Thunderf00t seems to get more approval around here, though. He argues that atheists shouldn’t criticize atheists and that all Muslims are bloodthirsty maniacs.
So, there was no substance at all in you criticism that was marginally in tangent with the topic of this tread – and you keep bringing up other things that’s not on topic.
How would you react to a friendly suggestion to sit down in a corner and shut the fuck up in shame?
I actually have to agree with friedandburnt on one point. It isn’t reasonable to interpret his statement in that video as meaning he thinks sex with unconscious women was okay. He didn’t lay out exactly what was vague about it, but from the rest of the video, it’s fair to conclude his problem was that he thought the prohibition against having sex with people who were restrained was unclear about whether it only applied to people who were restrained against their will and that coercion is a very broad concept. You might interpret that differently, but it isn’t fair to jump to the worst possibel conclusion (especially when he said that he found that part of the list basically OK) then assume that anyone who questions this also agrees with the worst possible interpretation of what TJ said.
I actually think objecting that the statement as whole was a bit vague is reasonable, though I would have been more specific about what was wrong with it. What isn’t so reasonable is 80% or so of the other things TJ said in that video. No need to get hung up on the most innocuous statement in a target-rich video.
friedandburnt
No shit, Sherlock, are they still fooling you with “got your nose”)?
That’s not what I said and if you had a third grader’s level of reading comprehension you’d understand that.
I said that he intentionally leaves it open so the audience can decide which is which, and they’ll chose the ones they find vague or inappropriate themselves.
Which means that the guy who thinks that giving women lots of booze to “loosen them up” is totes OK thinks that TJ agrees with him.
@ Gnumann: No thanks. I stopped caring what the cool kids were doing the very second I found out that rainbow parties were a myth.
“I said that he intentionally leaves it open so the audience can decide which is which,”
So now you’re a mind reader? Maybe he thought explaining why it was vague would be insulting to the reader’s intelligence. Maybe he didn’t want to add more length to the video when it was already around 20 minutes.
Ace of Sevens:
Yeah. I stopped watching Thunderf00t after he went all Pat Condell. He was pretty damned funny at times, and he has a very pleasant voice.
Then his bigotry shone through.
Ace of Seven
So, people don’t have the same priorities as you do.
Great, another person who comes to tell us what battles to fight.
So, stop trying. I’m pretty fed up with your vague statements. You make the claims, you provide the evidence.
true and I wished he didn’t. But fortunately I didn’t have to hand in my own opinion when I signed up here.
The thing you share with burntandfried is lack of reading comprehension.
friedandburnt
No, I’m deducting from his behaviour.
You know, if you’re unaware of the fact that indeed lots of people don’t consider it rape when the other one was heavily drunk, you should shut up about rape-criteria
Wait, now you are the mind-reader.
Called Randi yet to get your million?
That is plainly what you’ve been suggesting, though – that he was given a pass. It was a plausible notion, but it is not supported by or in keeping with the evidence you’ve been provided. Since we have not tolerated misogyny directed at other conservative Christian women here for some time and have spoken out against Islamophobia from Condell and other atheists, not to mention that we’ve consistently argued that misogynistic slurs insult all women regardless of their immediate target, it is extremely unlikely that many people here would have excused this person because his targets weren’t atheists. An equally plausible explanation, and one fully in keeping with the evidence, is that people’s knowledge of this guy and his popularity was limited. You should acknowledge that your accusations have not been supported and apologize, rather than trying this transparent maneuver:
“No, I’m deducting from his behaviour.”
Bullshit, you’re making a guess you have no real evidence to support
“Wait, now you are the mind-reader.”
Look up what the word “maybe” means.
For TJ to get this popular without being called out more, a lot of atheists have to be aware of his behavior and either approve or be willing to ignore it. Plenty of other people are almost as popular and just as bad and people are happy to ignore their sexism and race-baiting, whether it’s because they like to feel superior tot he people being criticized or don’t want to make waves by calling out a prominent atheist because arguments are like soldiers or they have some misguided notion of avoiding drama. I’m not saying everyone is responsible. Plenty of people don’t follow YouTube. However, plenty of people do. TJ is basically the face of atheism on one of the biggest sites on the Internet. How much are we going to make fucking excuses about how it was everyone else’s responsibility to notice?
Nigel:
Fucking painful, that’s what.
Look on the bright side, though: maybe you absorbed some of the caffeine through the blood vessels in your nose. Direct injection!
Re: Chernobog:
Wasn’t he the character in American Gods that kept threatening to bash Shadow’s skull in with a hammer?
carlie wrote:
…and it reminded me of this Q&A on YITR?
Oh god, you’re one of those guys. Assholes like you who justify their smug, smirky 1950s-style sexism with crap like, “I just loooooooooooove women!” make my flesh crawl. If I had a nickel for every time I had my day ruined by a skeevy prick like you, I’d be one of the 1%.
Cupcake, the things he posted on reddit and the bullshit he said about rape-survivors are evidence .
They are evidence that he doesn’t think rape to be a big deal, even though he is a rape victim himself (fucking people, how do they work?)
The strawmanning of feminism is a further piece of evidence.
They all point towards that whenever there is a possibility that he might or might not have said something fucking stupid sexist misogynist, it is reasonable to assume that he did.
Priorities are set largely subconsciously. Him being given a pass doesn’t mean he was intentionally given a pass. To give a solid example in this very thread, plenty of people have ignored slut-shaming, so long as it was directed at TJ. (To be fair, a lot of people probably didn’t get the banana reference, but there’s no way the people dropping it were the only ones who got it.)
Dr. Audley Z. Darkheart:
Yep. As Czernobog. It’s the same deity as the one from Fantasia.
All least, according to the all-knowing Wikipedia.
My point was that you were wrong. The evidence does not support your claim that he was being given a pass. If he was not being given a pass, it makes no sense to argue about whether has having been given a pass was intentional or not. You do realize that even if you ignore the evidence people have provided, others can still see it, right?
So, we return to you complaining about everybody here not policing your little playpen.
I don’t think there’s any point in engaging you any further.
Ace of Seven
Remember the first rule of holes?
Because that’s what you’re doing.
You’re accusing people left right and centre, but carefully avoid to name names.
So, let’s turn around:
What have you personally done to call him and others out except coming to blogs where other do it complaining that they didn’t do so earlier?
@gillel
Sweetie you don’t know what evidence means.
None of those things are evidence that 3 months ago he intentionally left out why that list was vague so that people would think fucking someone passed out isn’t rape.
He even said the list was sort of Ok at the end but hey don’t let the fact that you don’t know what you’re talking keep you from making wild unsupported guesses.
TheCollaboratrix:
Bingo. They “love women” so long as we don’t express any opinions that might challenge them. I mean, they probably love steak, a glass of whiskey, or a good cigar, too, but they certainly don’t expect those objects (noun used intentionally) to give them any guff.
When we do, damn, does the mask of “the old-fashioned gentleman” fall off and the misogyny come boiling out.
@SC and Gilell.
I think he has a point about giving TJ a pass. I’ve talked with a friend because we both did follow him and they has expressed basically the same thing. To paraphrase “Now I feel real bad about defending him as an asshole who meant well”
I think there was a lot that subconsciously you could forgive or gloss over, especially when someone is saying “hey the caustic persona isn’t the real me”…and it’s the type of deniability that collapses under something like this.
Before this week my friend and I probably would have said “yeah he’s good but his blind spot on feminism is embarrassingly stupid for him” We cannot any longer. Nor can anyone who is really honest
Oh, fuck you, you intellectually dishonest assclam.
I know what the AA means to an extent. I once had a look at a men’s anti-pornography group, and it was about the most self-hating, dishonest, anti-sex, puritanical thing I have ever seen. The problem with it was that it stopped being merely anti-pornography (which is perfectly fine) and became anti-sex. Suddenly the men began to inflict guilt on themselves, merely, it seemed, for having sexual desires, and what was demanded seemed to be a puritanical repression and denial of one’s honest desires and attractions.
This obviously isn’t healthy. What’s needed is an honest appraisal of sexuality as it influences the relations between the sexes, and not a return to the puritanism and guilt of the Abrahamic religions, disguised as egalitarian progress.
You do know that a good number of the big sex and porn shops were freaking started by feminists right?
No one’s arguing that no one on the planet gave him a pass, but that this is not the explanation for why there wasn’t widespread condemnation of him here or on related blogs that have criticized misogyny. If it were true that people here generally were letting his misogyny (because it was directed at conservative Christians) or Condell’s Islamophobia slide that would be a real problem we’d have to address. But that accusation concerning this blog is about as solid and well-informed as Be Scofield’s allegations about Greta Christina.
I only read to about comment 650 before I couldn’t stand seeing the same few idiots dig themselves deeper and deeper.
I’ll just say this, during TAA’s run as a reviewer on TGWTG he ended a review of the three star wars prequels with “These movies raped my childhood.”
As boring and filled with bad(racist) stereotypes as those films were, the use of that nasty, overused* phrase convinced me that he was as much of an idiotic, thoughtless windbag as he always seemed to be. Particularly something about the way he tried to imbue that phrase with so much angst made me especially weary. I never subscribed, or watched more of his stuff, but now I feel that I should do more, especially as he seemingly has a youtube partner account. Voting up videos that call him out should be a good start.
*within the Star Wars fandom (and other related fandoms).
Good work pharyngula regulars! What I read of the thread was filled with excellent takedowns and responses.
Every time I’ve seen someone link to one of his videos since the one he did summer 2009 I linked to upthread, I have posted a link to that video and pushed back on anyone who tried to defend him after that. I’ve also written a lot on Facebook about him. I’m sorry I haven’t had a bigger platform to fight from.
If you want me to name names
Nerd of Redhead. Do a search on Scienceblogs and you’ll see the post.
Not exactly a name, but Skeptic wiki, which until yesterday, said he was sometimes called abrasive and an e-beggar and engaged in a bit of slut-shaming, but felt no need to mention his sexism.
Greg Laden, but to be fair, he wasn’t familiar with TJ and deleted the video link when I pointed it out.
Atheist Perspective
Rusty Lime
And a hell of a lot of stuff on the forums at richarddawkins.net, Michigan Skeptics, League of Reason and plenty of other sites.
Even without names, the fact that he’s so popular is plenty of evidence he’s gotten a lot of support from atheists. The only possible explanations are that either the skeptical world is divided into nice, rational folks like us and mouth-breathers like TJ and we were all unaware of him because the groups don’t interact or a lot of nice, rational people have been giving him a pass.
To take this beyond TJ, Thunderfoot spoke at the Texas Freethought convention (well after he’d gone nuts) and has gotten approving links from PZ.
friedandburnt
Thank you for proving again Giliell’s Law for idiots on the internet.
Let’s see.
We have:
-His quote about rape-survivors
-His shit from reddit
Does that point towards somebdoy who:
-takes rape and rape-culture serious?
-dismisses the seriousness of rape and rape culture?
Do you think that:
-Without major events taking place, people’s personalities remain relatively constant over 3 months
-Even without major events taking place, people’s personalities change rapidly and unpredictably?
Well, since I think that people’s personalities remain pretty constant and change gradually (and there’s nothing in his behaviour over that period to indicate a dramatic change), and since I think that he doesn’t take rape serious, he loses the benefit of doubt. As easy as that.
Richard Coughlan makes another great video on this topic, though he’s perhaps too nice.
@Giliell. To be fair, TJ could not take rape seriously and think that having sex with an unconscious woman is not OK. In fact, I’m pretty sure this is the case. He seems to be your typical MRA who thinks rape isn’t OK, but doubting claims of rape and making joking threats of rape are OK. He does go a but farther than most in saying rape victims need to walk it off essentially, but I don’t think it’s fair to infer that he thinks unconscious women are fair game.
You don’t have any solid evidence as to why he said it was vague all you have is pure speculation.
For the sake of argument he doesn’t take rape seriously therefore he must not think screwing someone who’s passed out is rape?
If you seriously think that’s a logical progression you’re a total idiot.
There was nothing vague about the unconsciousness part of the list. What was vague was physically restrained and “psychological, physical, economic, or emotional coercion.”
You go way past benefit of doubt and into “let’s assume the worst instead of what’s logical”.
@friedandburnt: Not that I think Giliell’s interpretation is reasonable, I think TJ’s way past benefit of the doubt at this point. Hell, he already was when he made that video.
At this point, is a class of “basic reading comprehension for trolls and idiots” a good idea?
@Ace of Sevens
I have to ask, what do you want right now? People wern’t aware, they are now and are making noise. Lots of it too. What’s your problem? That we can’t change the past? Yeah if shouldas were horses.
I’ve coped to what you were talking about before? Shouldn’t we be moving on? Is it that important that you were the AA hipster?
@gilell
“They all point towards that whenever there is a possibility that he might or might not have said something fucking stupid sexist misogynist, it is reasonable to assume that he did.”
That’s not how logic works, you moron.
That’s akin to “well he committed a bunch of crimes already therefore whenever we think he might’ve committed a crime it’s reasonable to just assume he did”.
If you don’t see how that’s terrible logic you’re beyond hope.
Everybody can see that that’s terrible logic, but everybody but you can see that that wasn’t Gilells statement.
This isn’t a court of law. There is no hard rule of “benefit of doubt” for idiots. And there is no unschooled jury that would rather be someplace else. So your amateur play-lawyering isn’t going to impress anyone.
friedandburnt
Cupcake, is it nice winning against strawpeople?
Since we’re talking about evidence, could you quote me where I said that I thought he thought that raping passed out women was ok?
You know, as opposed to saying that he didn’t state what he thought to be vague and what not and thereby left the interpretation open to the viewer?
Ace of Seven
Same goes for you. Argue what I’ve claimed instead of arguing what you wished that I had claimed so you could refute it easily.
But thanks for putting up with evidence and I mean that.
But you’ve come up with ONE example from a Pharyngula regular, and one example of Greg Laden who withdrew it when pointed out, yet you came here acting like it was a massive problem here.
Ing
I well believe you, and I can understand it. I remember how it was with Thunderfoot: Once I noticed that he was an asshole I noticed that he had always been an asshole, only I hadn’t cared that much about it.
“but you can see that that wasn’t Gilells statement”
in this case it was. All her evidence is that “see he’s misognyist, and this is something a misogynist would do, therefore he must’ve done it”
@We Are Ing
If you weren’t aware, I wasn’t complaining about you. I’m saying lots of people were aware. I can’t prove who saw his sexist videos, but hundreds of thousands of people did and plenty of people in the atheist community have been promoting him by linking to his other videos. Some of those people had to have seen the sexist ones as well.
As for what would make me happy: for skeptics, at least, to quit thinking arguments are soldiers. That’s a bit utopian, but an environment where you couldn’t post links to TJ videos in major atheist fora without being linked here would go a long way, as would not inviting Thunderfoot to major conferences until he drops the martyr bullshit and embraces the idea that atheists need to criticize other atheists. A round of condemnation from the people that propelled him to popularity would also help.
“Cupcake, is it nice winning against strawpeople?”
They pose more insightful dialogue and logic, I can tell you that.
You implied that he didn’t with “You give him the benefit of doubt because there’s probably some trace of decency left in you that signals that sex with unconscious people = rape and you really want him to have that amount of decency left, too.”
Your accusations that he “intentionally leaves it open so the audience can decide which is which,” is still unsupported as there are other reasons why he left it open you haven’t debunked.
I watched him and was still not aware. Read what I said.
I don’t know what you want. People here have said they were either not following or only peripherally aware. Someone who was aware of him and followed has admited to a blindness and owned up to it.
What exactly are you looking for? Cause now it’s starting to feel like it’s that you just want a no-prize for being first.
Everyone here is condemning him. This is annoying now.
This “Amazing” Atheist is amazingly creepy… But his anti-feminist rant, and his bizarre justifications (“I’m submissive in bed so you can’t call me a misogynist”… wtf?) are excellent illustrations of this recent post by Holly at The Pervocracy: “The Five Geek Social Geek Fallacies of Sex”:
http://pervocracy.blogspot.com/2012/02/geek-social-fallacies-of-sex.html
(H/t: Skepchick.)
Most notably the #2, 3 and 4: “The weirder your sex, the more enlightened you are”, “Cool chicks don’t worry about sexism”, “Drama is always worse than the thing the drama is about”. (The last one apparently makes it justified for MRAs to rant endlessly about “crazy” feminists making drama out of “nothing”, for instance asking out a woman in an elevator at 4AM, or making rape jokes at a 15yo on Reddit, y’know…)
OK look. I don’t see how anyone can say the “sleeping girl sex is vague” and it be ok.
michaelmcguinness: “What’s needed is an honest appraisal of sexuality as it influences the relations between the sexes…”
Heteronormativity for the fail. Also, what Ing said.
@we are ing
“OK look. I don’t see how anyone can say the “sleeping girl sex is vague””
Nobody said that.
Irene: Work blocks Pervocracy, but “The weirder your sex, the more enlightened you are” strikes a chord. There is definitely a type of person who thinks being kinky makes them a better person, and the kinkier they are, the more “open-minded” they are. And how dare anyone “oppress” them by asking them not to discuss their favorite tawse and its effects at Thanksgiving dinner in front of Great-Aunt Edna.
The worst ones IMHO are the poly evangelists. Especially insofar as they imply or outright claim that monogamous people are insecure and selfish for wanting monogamous partners. Women get this guilt trip a lot, especially.
I don’t know any of those sites except RD.net, which I’ve long considered friendly to sexism and misogyny. I don’t read it, but have publicly commented many times about episodes when they’ve occasionally been pointed out. I’m not going to go read forums or scour for and watch obnoxious YT videos in search of misogyny or indulgence of it – I have enough right in front of me and directed at me.
Your comments on the previous post:
Are these “people” and “you”s you refer to anyone here? Any specific person associated with this blog? Because the evidence shows that people here have long called out misogyny (including that directed at conservative Christians) and Islamophobia (including from Condell). So
The former explanation (well, a variant) fits the facts far better than the latter. The latter is inconsistent with the evidence. It would be better for you to read TET and threads about women and about Islam here and on related blogs rather than searching for specific names.
@Gileill
I will admit that I had assumed that sine TJ is very popular, most people active in Internet atheism must be familiar with him. Apaprently the blog and YouTube audiences are more separate than I thought. I’ve hated this guy for years and gotten increasingly upset that attempts to call him out mainly lead to “yes, but” defenses like this.
Then, Rebecca Watson, who has less than 10% of his audience, mentioned a sexist guy in an elevator and got widespread support. Now that I think it over, this wasn’t a fair comparison. I shouldn’t be comparing her audience to TJ’s, btu to that of TJ’s victims. Her story didn’t get attention because EG ran to reddit and complained some stuck-up bitch called him mean names and turned him down for sex when all he did was try to corner her so she couldn’t pretend she didn’t here him or run away. It got attention because she brought it attention. Most of TJ’s victims had an audience of a few hundred or so, so they had no platform to fight back. This is why I can’t give enough props to Laci Green (who only had a about four thousand subs at the time, but wasn’t entirely obscure) for taking him to task.
So mea culpa. The idea that hardly anyone who mattered saw the videos in question until recently seems to be more plausible than I initially estimated. I assumed that because he had so many viewers, his audience must be the atheist community in general, but this isn’t necessarily the case. Yes, lots of people gave him a pass, but for all I know, these are mostly the same kettleblind types who give sexism a pass in general. Every campus group I’ve seen has a bunch of them, but the audience here may not.
BTW, I know YouTube will tell you where viewers of your own videos are. Is there a good way to get this info for someone else’s videos? I’m trying to estimate what percentage of self-identified American atheists are TJ subscribers. A rough figure in my head says about 2%, though if you are only including people who take an active interest in atheism on the Internet, it would be way higher.
dam this is still going on!
what a fool I was to think that just because it started out kind of slow and “normally rational” it would not draw in the lets yell and talk shit!
It is like this whether anyone likes it or not this is the world this is grown up real world of people talking. Any one can say what they want any time any where but they must be prepared to accecpt the results. No one can compel the results they want. There are things you can say that will draw the attention of the “Secret Service” or some other body. Why all this ridiculous argument over what you can say the only one here that has that right is PZ the master of this realm. If you talk utter crap like mister I hate women does you are going to be openly condemned for it. What drives all this hate and violent sexist talk and behavior is fear and resentment. All you will get is what you ask for. I for one would like to help make a more harmonious world but I accecpt that we do not have one yet. All this rape talk and given the great difficulty in rape law as practiced I do not seem to remember any lenient treatment of convicted rapists or much sympathy for accused rapists so maybe the real world is not so obliging.
If you go around talking shit all the time and throwing around insults and threats you should not be surprised if things you don’t want to happen happens. I my neighborhood you could get badly hurt. I live in the real world, my dog bites.
uncle frogy
I don’t know. I figured from a sheer numbers perspective, some of them would have to be. It would be like if no here had ever seen Friends. In retrospect, the subcommunities of atheism seem to be way ore separate than I realized.
What?
The point I was making was that getting an erection doesn’t depend on wanting to. What the fuck alternative reading did you arrive at?
To put it as I did on one of the other blogs, it turns out a lot of people don’t care about YouTube the same way I don’t care about Reddit. (I hadn’t called out sexism there because I was only dimly aware the site existed until the recent blow-up.)
friedandburnz
I’m sorry to disappoint you. But you’re welcome to leave.
You do realize that this is a statement I made about you, not about him?
Seriously, your reading comprehension sucks. And you complain about me being uncharitable…
Wrong again. It’s about doubt and the benefit of doubt. So, yes, given everything I know about him and his position, I don’t give him the benefit of doubt that he has a good working definition of what is rape.
Given all the possibilities, the evidence doesn’t point towards “everything else is a no-brainer, you know, one of these things is not like the other”
Especially given the discussions about rape and alcohol.
Oh, and I don’t need to debunk the other possibilities. I need to support my position, which I have.
Great – that’s your assignment! You are now to follow the entire internet looking for links to TJ and TF videos, even those that aren’t labelled, so that you can link to this thread. You’ll also need to stay and argue for hours with their defenders. If you miss a few favorable mentions or links or don’t have the time to follow through in each and every case, I will assume it’s because you’re giving them a pass for some bigoted reason. Of course, this doesn’t excuse you from pointing out every other instance of misogyny or Islamophobia or indulgence thereof from any relatively popular atheist anywhere on the internet. And don’t go making sorry excuses about how it’s everyone else’s responsibility. In fact, you could take some of the weight off of us, because we’re tired. That would be super. Thx.
I’m not really sure what is more disturbing- the insight into this asshat’s attitudes to women, his smug self-righteousness or that he appears to be my doppelgänger (any members of the horde that think they’ve seen him in Buckinghamshire please double check first before throwing something…)
Additionally, melding Comic-Book guy & Bill Hicks’ mannerisms does not make one a comedian, it actually makes one look rather sad.
With any luck this troll will never breed
Ace of Sevens:
I rarely go to Youtube unless I follow a link, or I’m looking up an obscure song. I don’t follow any atheist videos there. The quality is, at best, mediocre. And I’m not looking to be preached at, or to have someone tell me what I already know for 10 minutes.
In general, I stick pretty much to the blogs, where there’s some interaction. I get that especially here. The interaction is far more intelligent and interesting and educated, for the most part.
While I’m just one person, I suspect this is true of many of the regulars here. I would wager, though, that the kind of person who is attracted to Youtube wants a different kind of community than those who hang out in forums like this.
Good for you, but here’s a thought:
You don’t actually need us then.
Go play with the voices in your head, and stop dropping your rancid tripe here.
Er, no. Rebecca Watson, after the elevator incident, mentioned, in a public talk, that men should not do things like this. The misogyny and sexism storm hit an 11 (on a scale of 1 to 10) and then she recieved, rightly (in my useless opinion), support.
Prior to this episode, I was unaware who Rebecca Watson is. I stepped up and wrote on her behalf in reaction to the unrestrained and often violent misogyny of those who thought that saying ‘don’t do this’ was an assault on, er, on, um, something.
Kudos for attempting to shine a spotlight on the idiocy of the Amazing Atheist. Unfortunately, whether in meatspace or in cyber, the awareness of most of us (me included) only comes into play when the shit hits the fan. Which it did in Rebecca Watsons case. And, looking at the depth of misogyny in the first 800 comments, the shit finally hit the fan here. It is not necessarily one’s popularity, or one’s social cyber impact that determines whether or not one’s objections are noted. It requires a shit storm of epic proportions to bring most of this shit out into the open.
Also, keep in mind that many commenters, even well-known ‘old hands’, have very little interaction outside of a couple of blogs. Or Facebooks. Though I am known the Pharyngulista’s, outside of this space, no one knows who I am. Nor do I know who most of the important actors in modern atheism are unless their name comes through here. Sometimes because they have fuck up royally.
Ignorance is no excuse. But it can be an explanation.
Ace of Sevens
Gosh, I missed that S at the end all the time, sorry
Well, yes, it seems like it. I know that lots of people (including me) gave up on Youtube atheism long ago, partly because of the rampant sexism.
Well, actually no. It got attention because the misogynists got all mad about her suggestion that it was a tad inappropriate.
The original “incident” was an unremarkable part of and unremarkable video
Although as far as people around here never overlooking this sort of thing, posts 74 and 782 both were slut-shaming TJ, and this seems to either be OK or those two and me are the only people with the big embarrassing story that leaked about TJ a few months ago.
Sorry – our posts crossed. Thanks for this. I think it’s accurate.
(I still haven’t seen the videos in question. I can only take so much of these horrible people, and reading some of his words is enough for now.)
Yeah, that too. It’s worth pointing out TJ kind of led the charge here.
“Especially given the discussions about rape and alcohol.”
Discussion he was never involved in. Ever.
“I need to support my position, which I have.” You have not. You have offered nothing but speculation.
And it’s very good to know lots of people don’t watch that jackass. I’ve taken his popularity as something of a personal offense.
And I’m not suggesting we be the Internet police and go find discussions to inject ourselves into. I’m suggesting that people on the Internet need to stop thinking “that was kind of sexist but he’s funny and I agree with him about how much smarter people like us are than Christians, so I’ll let it slide.”
I’m probably guilty of this…not talking about it or insisting on talking about it but I subconsciously default to the presumption that people are bi+poly and just aren’t secure with it….I have to remind myself that there are actually people who are straight/gay.
Glob damn it yes we get it. Agreement. I made a public coping to doing exactly that which I didn’t have to to draw attention to that. What more do you want?
I think a lot of the TJ defenders are falling into one of the Geek friends fallacies. “The ostracizes are evil”
*sigh* This character keeps looking worse and worse. TJ Kincaid admits to being harsh with a school kid in Finland (making “videos where I rip him the fuck apart”) who went on to commit mass murder (PZ blogged about it), and then TJ bragged about how he had predicted that happening: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GIKUWgsIncg
I wouldn’t have thought much of it (going after people like DM and Chris has been done here after all), but after seeing the video where Kincaid goes after Tyler Clementi post-humously, I’m not so sure anymore that Kincaid was blameless. All but one of the links to related videos on that clip where he goes after the Finland murderer have been removed, so we can’t see how harsh Kincaid really was in total, but the one active link shows him to have been really mellow and not harsh at all. It’s hard to tell when Kincaid is being an “entertainer” or being real with us. Can one’s personality be consumed by the character they play?
Never mind. I told myself I was going to stay out of this, I saw a place that I might make a reasonable comment, and shouldn’t have.
Screw it.
‘Bye.
That’s possible. I wasn’t familiar with it because to the best of my recollection I wasn’t familiar with him at all. I don’t know if your characterization of those comments is accurate or not, but I don’t think anyone’s claimed or would claim that people here are perfect and never overlook anything problematic. Sometimes something we let pass is pointed out by someone new. Sometimes I think they’re right, sometimes not. They usually get some pushback, but often it ends with people thanking them for drawing attention to the problem.
It’s called “becoming the mask”
I personally suspect that it is a real thing.
After which an elaborate anecdote about his flirting followed…
Why did this guy feel the need to tell us this? Seriously, I’m confused?
BINGO!
Yet it is there.
Something that’s widely debated.
Something where lots of people simply reject the notion that it is rape.
So, do you think it is plausible that somebody who doesn’t think that filling women up and having sex with them when they’re too drunk to make a decision is rape would have thought that TJ is on his side?
So, the most charitable interpretytion is that he doesn’t care enough about rape and rape-victims to tell those assholes that he is not on their side, because he never bothered to get informed about the things he talks about.
The middle ground is that he has no intention to piss the drunk-rapists off by showing his colours.
The worst is that he agrees with them.
Which I haven’t said.
Will you knock it off already? You’re talking to the wrong audience, and insinuating that we’re the right one. If people on the internet are thinking that, and I’m sure there are plenty who are, there’s no way we can know it. People doing or promoting sexist things is actively not tolerated around here. Again, it’s not perfect, but the culture is pretty much the opposite of what you’re describing.
Or rather, one anecdote on a very bad flirting attempt, one about workplace sexual harassment.
It sounds like you didn’t watch to the end of that video. He specifically address this issue. I won’t say that he ever said, “this clearly inexcusable thing is OK,” but he does frame his arguments to make rape concerns look as trivial as possible.
I do think that if he says that parts of a list are a bit vague, it isn’t fair to assume he meant the least controversial item on the list was a bit vague (as opposed to the items in the list that were vague by any standard), even taking the rest of the video into account, but his argument amounts to “rape is bad, but it’s also no big deal. Feminists are whining and, just like rape victims frequently do. They just hate men and want attention.” The fact that he doesn’t misrepresent all the facts isn’t really a defense of anything.
“So, the most charitable interpretytion is that he doesn’t care enough about rape and rape-victims to tell those assholes that he is not on their side,”
No that’s just what you desperately want to paint this as. The best interpretation is that he thought it’s vagueness was obvious and did not need to be spelled out.
Touché!
I know! Just that one strange drive-by. And it’s profoundly disturbing that he thought it would fit right in on a thread about rape.
Look fucker. After this and other stuff about his personality, saying something that is a goddamn dog whistle, retroactively we do not give the benefit of the doubt.
Hell in light of what I’ve seen, with how he butchers the other side of the story horrendously to make himself look better, I don’t trust a lot of what he has said in the past. I am inclined to put more benefit of doubt to the opposite side now.
Wait who the hell stated that this was 3 months ago it was 8.
“rape is bad, but it’s also no big deal”
Where the hell was this?
“They just hate men and want attention.”
He said that about the one woman featured in the video (and she really does hate men as evidence by her other blog posts), not about all feminists.
“saying something that is a goddamn dog whistle”
Again that’s just what you want to think. He never implies anywhere that everything in there is vague, in fact you’d have to be an idiot to think “unconscious” was the vague part of it he was referring to.
What makes you think I’m taking about you? When people say that men need to stop raping and men pipe up to leave them alone, because they aren’t raping anyone, who’s right? This exact conversation has taken place here many times. I’m saying it’s a serious problem. If people here are already objecting when TJ’s name comes up (or a similar person who they are familiar with), then great. If they are additionally pointing out to other people they should be speaking up when they notice people letting things slide, then that’s even better. The fact that TJ has a few defenders tells me not all Pharyngula readers are on board, though as do the banana jokes.
As to the banana thing, someone leaked a video of TJ anally masturbating with a banana, which he did in a private webcam show. Some people think it’s cute to try to shame him with this. It isn’t. If you do this, you are a part of the problem.
Pentatomid:
An awful lot of straight cis guys seem to think that because society teaches them that their preferences and desires are paramount, everybody wants to hear about said preferences and desires at any given moment.
Even more, such men find discussions of rape and misogyny highly uncomfortable, because women as people are being centered in such discussions instead of the men and what their penises like. Mikey’s anecdotes were meant to (a) turn the conversation back to its rightful topic, and (b) put us li’l wimminz in our place, i.e., as objects for him to jerk off over and harass.
You are bullshiting if not out right lying now. Go away
Adding on to what Ms. Daisy Cutter said, I think that way too many people believe that sexism is “over” and strict male/female gender roles are no longer enforced in the culture, so guys like Mikey think they’re being oh-so-different and unique by relating to women like they’re Varga girl pinups. How wrong they are, on so many levels.
I’m the one who got the time wrong. I confused it with another video.
Watch starting at 3:10. He conflates her views with feminism in general.
“So, do you think it is plausible that somebody who doesn’t think that filling women up and having sex with them when they’re too drunk to make a decision is rape would have thought that TJ is on his side?”
No. There is nothing vague about unconscious. There is other parts that were vague which is why he said that some of it is vague.
I’ve only got the last 150-odd comments on my screen now. Is some stupid sack of shit trying to scapegoat people with autism-spectrum disorders for this asshole’s behavior?
Yes
@Friedandburned
Look…we do not care. I’ll grant TJ a mulligan on that one if it’ll shut you up. There’s still a swarm of horrible
Ace of Sevens, since you attribute one of my comments (#782) as being slut-shaming, I will cop to some of the charge, since intent isn’t magic, and you obviously interpreted my bringing up the banana in that way.
It was you however you called this “embarrassing”, and have then gone on to describe what it was all about, which is far more slut-shaming. I don’t care if TJ privately masturbates with a banana, a watermelon, or a canteloupe as I don’t think his private sexuality has any relevance to him being a bad person. You’ve now drawn far more attention to this leaked video and slut-shamed him more than I have.
I encountered one of TJ’s videos last year, and at the time I posted a comment on the Endless Thread deploring that there were so many people apparently following this vacuous imbecile. Because there is not a huge overlap between people who voraciously comment on a textual medium like FreeThoughtBlogs or ScienceBlogs on the one hand, and YouTube on the other (bearing in mind that the comments on YouTube are a cesspit of vile bigotry), few people seemed to have noticed TJ. My post didn’t attract much further comment.
I very rarely look at any YouTube video that gets linked in a thread: if someone posts “argumentum ad YouTube”, expecting me to watch 10 minutes of video, rather than writing a comment which can sum up their position and which I can read in 1 or 2 minute, then they are a douchebag. The main people interacting with videos on YouTube seem to be other YouTube users – hence the video replies between e.g. VenomFangX and Thunderf00t, or Zinnia Jones replying to various homophobic/transphobic posters.
Basically, the few people who had heard of TJ before this blow up like myself, have been expecting some fuckup like this for a considerable amount of time.
Worse. He was using the fact we can’t prove TJ isn’t autistic to excuse his behavior. Never mind that the idea you shouldn’t threaten people with rape isn’t dependent on social cues.
That’s, um, completely unrelated to how autism spectrum disorders actually function.
You worthless piece of rat shit.
Thecollaboratrix: Yeah, it’s like “hipster racism.”
Azkyroth: Yes. Search the first page for “jimashby”.
“Watch starting at 3:10. He conflates her views with feminism in general.”
On that one view yes but the view is man-hating so I guess that makes you right anyway.
Did you see that goalpost?
Ya know, I talked about sex with drunk and intoxicated people.
If you are unable to understand that intoxicated =/= unconscious, you have a lot of learning to do.
And yes, “some” without qualifier leaves the interpretation open to the viewer.
Ya know, it’s like going to a bar because they have some of the best beer in the world. I talk about Guinness and Beamish, you think about Bud and Bud Light.
What I really really don’t get is that friedandburnt, despite the fact that he thinks the voices in his head is better than us, seems hellbent on convincing us that the little asswipe wasn’t a total asswipe 8 months ago.
Is there any conceivable reason why?
@Gnunman
YES! I totally understand it!
Let me cross post a reply from AE thread
I think it’s exactly like where I was with the lesser crimes of his, just for some reason this hasn’t triggered the epiphany moment for fried it did with me. Maybe it’s a difference in values?
Am I glad I’m not that kind of straight cis guy. Yay braincells!
Ms. Daisy Cutter, may I just reiterate again how much I love you right now?
And is also too much a victim of Dunning-Kruger to realize that “rape isn’t OK” contradicts “doubting claims of rape and making rape jokes is OK”.
Still catching up on the thread here, but a quick aside: Ms. Daisy Cutter, you’re correct. A variation of the name, “Czernobog” was used by Neil Gaiman in American Gods, for an “old world god” indicated to be Slavic and connected to violent death.
I had never heard of this asshole before yesterday. I don’t really care if he was friendly, soft-spoken, and nice to kittens eight months ago. All I know is he’s an utter asshole who makes rape threats to rape victims.
If before yesterday you had said “asshole Kincaid” I would have thought you were talking about an “artist” who spells his name a bit differently.
I think the most accurate way to summarize it is “Rape is bad, but I’ll never believe it happened unless I like the victim, dislike the perp or see it with my own eyes. People I don’t know or don’t care for can be assumed to be making it up for attention unless proven otherwise.”
I didn’t think I was doing that. Besides the fact that he is not a woman, it’s just funny (and ironic given how the banana is The Atheist’s Worst Nightmare) and now a meme when it comes to TJ Kincaid. He doesn’t give a fuck anyway (watch his Bananagate 2011 video). And if that is slut-shaming, then what is our use of hoggling supposed to be? No, I think you need to make a case for how that remark is slut-shaming him.
See: Slut Shaming 101
Everything you’ve said about these blogs and people here knowing or not knowing about this dude. You apologized for having made assumptions about this community. Your comment alleging slut-shaming began “Although as far as people around here…” You’re very obviously talking in some significant part about people here and not just random people on the internet.
If people saying that are referring vaguely to “you” and very much implying, and occasionally saying, that they’re talking about those men they’re addressing, those men are right to be angry at the false insinuation. Especially if they’ve spent the past several years speaking out against rape and rape culture and have never come across these people making the insinuation.
What are you talking about? Now you’re very clearly referring to people here, but again failing to provide anything concrete. If you’re complaining about some specific behavior in the hopes of changing it, it’s necessary to point to that specific behavior.
They are, and I’ve pointed you to examples of it. Why don’t you go read the past six or seven iterations of TET, and come back when you’re done? You aren’t familiar with this blog, so stop making claims about it.
Do you know how many people around the world read this blog, or show up to make obnoxious comments? Do you think we can zap them or their comments out of existence through sheer force of will? I was right before. You’re an intellectually dishonest assclam. I won’t hold my breath for you to stick around here joining us in fighting bigotry.
*reviews*
I see Friedandburned_extracrispy picked his shovel up and burrowed all the way down to the land that time forgot.
what a completely clueless git.
I hope it was worth it to him.
people have long memories here.
Same here – and I rarely even follow links. I was hardly aware of The Amazing Arsehole’s existence before this thread. (As it happens, I’ve never been able to watch more than a minute of two of Friends either – the inane, screeching laughter from the studio audience would have prevented me even if nothing else did.)
But I must admit a series of events in the last year, involving the vilest misogyny, and some highly unpleasant Muslim-hating, have come near to turning me off the “online atheist community” altogether. Pharyngula is one of the few places I can be sure I won’t be fighting these things as part of a small minority, and I can certainly do without seeking out the places where they’re more or less unchallenged.
@SC: I’ve been here for years. I just don’t always have time to participate in the rater busy comments. I comment more frequently on Ed and Natalie’s blogs as they’re easy to keep up with.
I’m not saying you are responsible for every drive-by poster. I’m saying they exist and are liking reading what I post. My point was that the fact you and your friends don’t participate in a problem is no reason not to discuss it. See every other thread about sexism. They’re all full of people saying “I don’t do that” as if all discussion was about them and since they aren’t doing it, people shouldn’t talk about it. You don’t have to read many posts to see not everyone is on board.
Well, sure, because the most important thing to remember is that a woman’s appearance and how she chooses to look is totes ok so long as there’s a man who finds her attractive, nevermind that her appearance is to suit herself and not you, amirite?
Seriously, you’re not helping, you’re part of the problem.
Same here. I still subscribe to a couple of youtube atheists (most notably AronRa), but yeah, the events over the past year have been pretty horrible. Good thing I discovered Pharyngula and Skepchick earlier this year.
Ace of Sevens, you also might want to consider that there is very probably a demographic mismatch between TJ’s YouTube constituency and readers of Atheist blogs. Sure there are ~300,000 people apparently following The Abysmal Arsehole, but who are they?
I’ve had no success finding the comment about TAA I vaguely remember posting last year. My google-fu is weak…
I’ve been convinced that’s mostly the case at this point. As to who these guys are, I’m guessing twenty-some white guys who think Christianity is for retards and are mad it tells women not to put out. That’s based on his few fans I’ve met in person.
Judging from your comments, you must also lack the time to read them.
If they were making those comments and those were regularly ignored here, that would be a problem “people here” could fix. All we can do is contest them, which we do, so there’s no problem.
? If you meant “likely reading,” that’s fine. But you should make it clear that you’re referring to a subset of internet atheists whose comments would not go unchallenged here.
I’m not talking about myself and my friends. I’m talking about the community and culture here and at related blogs. The problems you’re pointing to aren’t nonexistent around here, but the culture is completely and actively contrary to that manner of thinking.
What specific problem is it that you want to discuss? The problem is that you’re inventing a problem here, refusing to provide specifics, and ignoring all of the evidence that it’s not a problem here. Of course that’s a problem elsewhere on the internet, but we are not the internet police.
I call bullshit. Point to a pattern of specific, concrete instances of what you’re talking about, make it absolutely clear that you are not referring to anyone around here, or STFU.
Frankly I had no idea who the hell the guy was until this blew up. I vaguely recall seeing his name pop up occasionally, but like Nigel said further upthread, I’m one of those atheists who doesn’t particularly care for or pay attention to atheism on YouTube or reddit. Majority of my interaction with the online communities is through FTB (previously SB), Skepchick and a handful of other blogs.
The recent odiousness with reddit and now this with the Asshole Atheist isn’t doing much to commend either medium to me.
Sigh. Sadly that applies to more atheists of my acquaintance than I’d care to admit. Which is why I don’t really acquaint myself with them anymore. Someone said elsewhere that it’s unfortunate that being an atheist doesn’t inoculate you from stupidity – we all swim in the same poison that permeates our overall culture and we all carry its stain to varying degrees. Which is why it’s all the more important that we work to purge it from our systems – both as individuals and as communities – as soon as it’s brought to our attention.
The specific problem I’m wanting to discuss is people who were aware on TJ’s behavior and didn’t say anything because they thought he was funny or going after acceptable targets or whatever. This clearly happened or he wouldn’t be the most popular atheist on a very popular website, though you can’t really prove who these people were for the most part. It must have been lots of people, though and it isn’t a stretch to say these people are active in the atheist community online. Don’t you think this reflects poorly on atheists? Doesn’t this bother you?
Do you think 307 here had a good argument? That’s the sort of thing I’m talking about. The fact that you aren’t doing something has never been a valid reason to shout down discussion of a real problem here.
Ace of Sevens,
in case you didn’t notice, last year was a fairly target-rich environment for misogynistic arseholes, and a lot of us had our hands full dealing with answering those people, since a lot of these exchanges were in textual media – on blogs.
So why aren’t you leading the crusade against YouTube? Against misogyny and bigotry on Reddit r/atheism? Against ERV?
Of course this bothers us, what a douchebag way of trying to guilt-trip us for not reacting before now.
Like I said, I’ve called him a misogynist whenever discussion of him has come up. Culture is widespread, I have my fingers in a lot of different pies and I can’t devote all of my spare time to the jihad against people saying Stupid Things on the Internet. For fuck’s sake, Daniel.
Also, Ace of 7s, you really might want to think about the way you phrase your remarks. Intent isn’t magic. Someone reading your post here could easily jump to the conclusion that you are a rape apologist troll indulging in a gratuitous “Yes, but…”. It certainly made me look twice. When the first comment on a blog post tersely dismisses the subject with “You don’t understand.” it strongly suggests complete disagreement with the author.
I was only vaguely aware of reddit’s existence, much less the general tone there until recently. I’d like to lead the crusade on YouTube, but I have 13 subscribers. If someone would be kind enough to give recommendations for software to download and edit videos so I can do proper responses (with clips) instead of just talking at a camera, that would help.
I’m a bit ashamed, but the dense is so hard I got to take a quick de-flounce.
Did it ever occur to you that this discussion would be better off in a place where there is a significant number of these people? Count here so far is more than three and less than ten, and that’s a pretty charitable count.
I mainly think this rather reflects badly of the youtube community. As said time and time again, most people here are not part of it. Coming in here crying “whaaaaaa – you’re not fixing my community” is going to net you very few friends, but a lot of rather annoyed people. Either you should try to fix it yourself, or you should walk the fuck away.
>blockquote>Do you think 307 here had a good argument?
No, and from I scan from the tread, neither did anybody except himself. What’s your point? You’re not contributing to discussion of a real problem, you’re a little kid sitting in the corner going “whaaaa – mememememememememeME” while the adults are talking.
Dear god, Ace. What do you expect? Most of us commenting here logged, truthfully and not an exaggeration, literally thousands of comments read and responded to during Elevatorgate. We’ve hassled sexism whenever it shows up here, including when it’s directed at pieces of shit like Sarah Palin and Ann Coulter because no, it’s not ok when sexism is directed at people you don’t like. There are only so many hours in the day, and contrary to popular belief, feminists don’t go looking for stuff to get mad about. I have a job. I have two kids. When I have time for the internet, I hang out here, and a couple of feminist blogs, and have an RSS feed for the ones I want to read but don’t care to wade into comments for. And sometimes I hang out in places where I can talk about fluff like Top Chef and Downton Abbey and giggle at the crap people put up on Etsy. I’ll call out crap when I see it, but I’m not going to spend my time searching it out.
Because nearly 1000 comments on this thread alone, the majority of which are angry about TJ’s behavior and calling out the shit being spewed by his defenders, clearly indicates that this isn’t something that bothers us or reflects poorly on atheists.
Seriously dude, I get where you’re coming from here, but you are flogging this in the wrong place and to the wrong people. What exactly do you think we are doing when we call out behavior like TJs and his supporters? Twiddling our thumbs? None of us can be everywhere at once. It takes a lot of time going between FTB, YouTube, reddit and the many number of atheist sites all over the web. We can’t track every instance of sexism or racism or any other kind of intolerable behavior.
We’re discussing the problem RIGHT NOW. We’ve been discussion the problem of sexism and misogyny in general on this blog for A LONG TIME (and I’ve only been around for a couple of years), and TJ’s behavior in particular because oh look, a major figure in the atheist community decided to call TJ out. And every single freaking time PZ or anyone else has even thought to point out instances of sexism and misogyny in the atheist community, it triggers a deluge of “ZOMG overreactive feminazis making mountains out of molehills” to the point where it’s beyond feeling like trying to stem an incoming tide with teeny tiny bean bags. It’s tiring, it’s demoralizing and no matter how hard good people keep trying, there’s just more of it than can be handled all at once.
TJ is just one misogynistic asshole out of many – the fact that he slipped past a lot of people’s radars owes just as much to the atheist community’s problem with acknowledging its own issue with sexism and misogyny as it does to the fact that TJ’s brand of crap *isn’t so atypical as to arouse immediate notice*. Seriously, the problem isn’t so much that no one called him out on it before so much as it is that his typical behavior is often considered *average* and it took a disgusting episode of this magnitude to grab attention. That’s not the fault of any handful of individuals, it’s part of the culture we’re trying to change.
So you might want to think about why some of us are taking your attempts at starting a discussion that’s already been going on for ages as pointless and condescending. You think people here aren’t doing the job right? Why are you in here then, when you could be out there slugging it out with TJ’s ilk like you apparently think the rest of us should be? Lead by example and all that.
Apparently it’s easier to tell others what they’re doing wrong than to go out and do what you’re telling them the need to do yourself.
I brought it up here because here seemed like a place people would care and do something. I can’t assume that about most spaces. In retrospect, I suppose TJ’s Elevatorgate video would have gotten more attention here if people were aware of him.
And how exactly do you know that the many, many commenters in here for whom fighting sexism and misogyny in atheism is an important task *aren’t* already out there “doing something” on their own time?
nigel & KG:
Same here. The last thing I want to spend my time doing is wading through asshole commentary just to find one decent being in that cesspit.
YouTube is for music videos, supercuts, and silly animal videos. Nothing else is worth it.
I’m kind of amused over the assumption that we should be the internet police, though.
That’s fine. But what you were doing was not pointing to examples of that but assuming that a significant number of people in these parts were ignoring it or keeping silent based on the fact that there wasn’t much if any condemnation of him, ignoring – as you’ve now acknowledged – the more reasonable possibility that people around here just weren’t particularly aware of him. Sure, some people probably thought that, but that is not an argument generally accepted by the culture here, and you’ve been shown evidence that misogyny towards conservative Christian women is not tolerated and that Condell has been condemned repeatedly in very strong terms. Of course we don’t catch or respond to every single fucking instance of real or possible bigotry on every fucking thread. But that doesn’t mean that it’s tolerated.
I don’t know how many of these people are letting it slide and how many are misogynists. I’m sure there are lots of both. Do you think we’re fucking unaware that there’s a huge problem with misogyny and its toleration by atheists? Do you think that’s fucking news to anyone here?
Is this a joke? You could’ve found a far better example than some single comment from 2010 that you think should have been challenged. Why, just the other day someone said “cunt” and I saw it and didn’t say anything. I’m such an enabler. You know what? Go fuck yourself. After spending literally months and thousands of comments over the past several years fighting this stuff, being lied about and called a cunt, bitch, and twat, losing one friendship* and seeing another strained recently because I don’t let bigotry or its toleration slide, working with so many other good people here to make these blogs into the great spaces they are, to hear some jerk like you suggesting that we have a real problem with tolerating bigotry around here makes me furious.
*Well, that one ended because the person in question was a terrible friend, but it had to do with this.
Jesus, how did I screw that up?
Flip the quotes, plz. Then it’ll all make sense:
Carlie:
Amen. We’re all busy enough already, and when the shit hits the fan here, it tends to take over lives. Hell, I got my pancreas broken! ;)
Ace of Sevens, you seem to be under the impression that we’re all a bunch of unemployed white knights just waiting for the call to our chargers. Not so.
Audley:
I don’t follow video links at all and was completely unaware of this TAA idiot before this post/thread.
I don’t even watch a lot of the videos PZ posts because of my net connection. I can’t believe I even have to explain this once again – not everyone on the net has a fantastic, handy dandy, super fast, unlimited connection to the net.
Caine:
Too true.
And I feel that I need to point out to Acie that even those of us that do have a fast, unlimited connection aren’t going to waste our time with watching every godamned fucking video that gets posted. I’ve got better shit to do and as far as entertainment/education goes, I can think of a whole host of things that are more important to me than trying to find some Youtube douchebucket to be angry about.
Here’s my deal: I don’t really give a good goddamn if someone is an internet-famous atheist. I don’t seek that shit out– I think I found Pharyngula by following a link on a political blog*.
I know, I know. I’m such a terrible fucking person for not fighting against every single fucking weasel fucker on the goddamn internet. I’m so sorry to have disappointed you all. :(
*Sadly No!, perhaps.
Ace, what is it like being the single most important being on the face of the planet? I’m sure it’s a real burden.
Audley:
Yeah, me too. It’s not like we ever drown in that shit here, oh no*.
*Eyes this thread suspiciously, thinks back to 3D4K.
I also don’t follow atheist videos on Youtube, or any video channel, for that matter (OK, except for the Taiwan Action News, they’re usually cool). Most atheist stuff I’ve seen on Youtube came from the links on Pharyngula.
I really don’t get Ace of Sevens’ problem. The biggest atheist blog now has addressed the guy, and now all of us who didn’t know about this guy (incl. me) now know about him and his misogyny. Awareness raised, thanks PZ, I say.
This blog has really opened my eyes, especially during EG, but it’s been consistent in it. In a way, I’ve never looked at the world the same way again. Like recently I was revisiting a guilty pleasure of my youth, the first Xanth novel, and in one of the very first chapters there was a rape-apologist scene. Bleargh.
Ok up front I’m a bi (tending more to L) disabled woman. I have never heard of this waste of O2 until this recent blowup – I do follow some you tube ppl such as potholer 54 and to check on bands I get told about.
However, and I fully admit I may be totally wrong about this, I feel that the Pharyngula “crowd” per se are not that into YouTube. I follow FTB/SciBlogs/Skepchick/ and various atheistic/science/freethought podcasts.
The rancid ravings of this misogynistic ghoul have4 IMO no place within our community – we should be looking at being inclusive not exclusive.
As a victim of abuse and extreme violence I live with the consequences of those acts, they inform and shape my reactions although I try to overcome them. For anyone to casually “joke” about rape or violence against a person is utterly despicable, no matter what for their sexuality takes (i.e. in this case Dom/sub for TAA).
Rape is a crime about power, and fear, and bone deep terror of walking alone along a street at night. Violence is about feeling your bones break, fading into the red subconscious, losing yourself in the primal urge to survive, becoming a meat machine that works on the kill or be killed level. These are not joking matters. they are not trivial matters.
The are things that define us, give us meaning, set about us the bounds of humanity.
I’ve lived through that, and found that having been there it isn’t easy to step back through that doorway, although I wouldn’t change my decision ever.
However, to have some misogynistic fuckwit spew his vitriolic rape apologetics and see him defended so vigorously makes me sick.
How can people NOT see the hate and bile he spews? Are you so blind that you think taking sexual advantage of someone NOT fully consenting is OK???7
Do you not have a mother, sister daughter, brother, son or father???
Are you so immured in your island of privilege and sociopathy that you have no empathy for the other??? Can you not ever imagine yourself in such a situation?
I have seldom read so long a thread here that I have felt moved to comment, normally I lurk and think to myself “well said” or ” I wish I could have put it that way”.
Seldom have I been moved to say that these people THESE BELIEFS are so repugnant, so vile that I feel compelled to comment in such a personal way.
However, in the end though, the horde has helped me again, to all of you with your insightful, pithy, sarcastic, bitchy comments to the MRA and rape apologists, thank you, just for being here and letting me vent.
Hugs to all the horde
Well I first watched one of his videos several years ago and I originally thought he was hilarious at doing satire. But I rarely watched his videos, having fully watched about six of his videos in total (including his Elevatorgate one and the anti-feminist one at around the same time I think) by the time this episode happened where he seems to have come unhinged on Reddit. And yes, when Elevatorgate happened, a whole lot of people, TJ Kincaid included, took it as an opportunity to verbally bash Rebecca Watson, which exposed their hatred of her, her supporters, and feminists. His ranting hardly stood out from the rest then.
Perhaps one reason we haven’t much discussed him in the past is because he is almost always over-the-top and hateful and violent. That’s his schtick. When TJ’s Elevatorgate video was mentioned on Butterflies and Wheels (comments #13 and #38 in particular), it only garnered a few comments about how pathetic of an argument it was–not worth watching–and how angrily violent it sounded. What else is there to say about it? You can’t come to a mutual understanding with people like that, especially when they put on their best Bill O’Reilly-ish face as TJ Kincaid always seems to do. And TJ Kincaid hasn’t joined in any of the blog threads about women or how women are treated around the world AFAIK. But who knows, he could have been one of the hundreds of trolls that people here and elsewhere have smacked down before.
His anti-anti-bullying video just sickens me. I saw it for the first time today. But we’ve been fighting that same kind of shit for months now. There has been nothing new or original about TJ Kincaid’s aggressive rants that would set them apart from the rants of any other antagonstic troll until this rape threat incident on Reddit.
Caine:
Of course not! Pharyngula is all just unicorn farts and butterfly vomit, dontchaknow.
*sigh* I don’t even want to take a guess at how much time I’ve spent on these topics here– even though I pretty much bowed out of the EG threads and I haven’t been around as long as a lot of the other regulars, I know that I’ve wasted a whole shit ton of time arguing with sexist asshats.
Now I’m supposed to pick fights on Youtube, too?
Audley:
No shit. Personally, I’d rather face the great zombie uprising than deal with the idiots populating youtube.